Dismissed

Marammal, v. The Thasildar

Madras HC18 Feb 2020WP/2252/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a Legal Heir Certificate via writ petition to establish heirship to her late husband's estate. The Court found conflicting evidence from the deceased's native place indicating another son and wife as potential heirs. It held that the writ court cannot resolve these facts. The petitioner was directed to approach the competent Civil Court to resolve the heirship dispute by impleadi

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to approach the competent Civil Court to resolve the conflicting facts and implead all interested parties.

Marammal, Vs The Thasildar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 18.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶5

W.P.No.2252 of 2020

¶6

Marammal .. Petitioner
..Vs..
1. The Tahsildar,
Pennagaram Taluk,
Dharmapuri District.
2. The Revenue Inspector,
Pennagaram,
Dharmapuri District. ..Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus,
directing the respondents to issue Legal Heir Certificate to the
petitioner, based on Representation dated 02.12.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ravi
For Respondents : Mr.G.Rajesh
Government Advocate
O R D E R

¶7

The writ petition has been field in the nature of mandamus, seeking issuance of Legal Heir Certificate to the petitioner based on the representation dated 02.12.2019.

¶8

The writ petition had been field by Marammal W/o.(Late) Maran residing at K.Kullathirampatti Village, Koothapadi Post, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District against the respondents namely the Tahsildar, Penangaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District and the Revenue Inspector, Penangaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of this petition, it had been stated that the husband of the petitioner, Maran, died on 21.01.2010, leaving behind the petitioner and her daughter Vennila as his only legal heirs. The petitioner had applied for the Death Certificate of Maran and obtained the same. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for Legal Heir Certificate. Since the Legal Heir Certificate was not issued, and since on

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

the representation dated 24.01.2019 and 02.12.2019, given by the petitioner, no orders have been passed in the representation, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶12

A counter affidavit has been filed by the 1^st respondent namely the Tahsildar, Penangaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District. In the counter affidavit, it had been stated that the husband of the petitioner was a native of Anchetty, Krishnagiri District. Hence, the 1^st respondent had directed the Tahsiildars of Anchetty and Denkanikottai to furnish the family details by letter dated 05.10.2019 in Roc.No.940 of 2019. It is also stated that the petitioner has been given fill liberty to approach the Revenue Divisional Officer, Dharmapuri and District Collector, Dharmapuri in this subject matter.

¶13

On perusal of records, it appears that the deceased Maran was living with his first wife by name Puttamma along with his son namely Venkatesan in his native place Anchatty, Krishnagiri District.

¶14

Similarly, the learned Additional Government Pleader also passed a letter of the Tahsildar, Anchetty, dated 14.02.2020, a copy of which has been forwarded to the learned counsel for the petitioner along with the representation given by Venkatesh who is claimed to be a son of Maran. In the said representation, it is claimed that the said Venkatesh has stated that he is the only son of Maran and hence, he and his mother/1^st wife of Maran, Puttamma are the natural legal heirs of the deceased Maran.

¶15

In view of the conflicting facts, the jurisdiction of writ Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India cannot be invoked. It would only be advisable for the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court, implead the 1^st wife namely Puttamma and her son Venkatesh and also the relevant Tahsildars and thereafter may proceed with the case in the manner known to law.

¶16

With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶17

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶18

vum

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

¶21

The Tahsildar,
Pennagaram Taluk,
Dharmapuri District.
2. The Revenue Inspector,
Pennagaram,
Dharmapuri District.
+1cc to Mr.M.Ravi, Advocate, SR.No.13674.
+1cc to Government Pleader, SR.No.14254.
W.P.No.2252 of 2020
VD(CO)
CSR: 13.03.2020

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Marammal, v. The Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Marammal, v. The Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

I.Selvaganapathy Vs Inspector General of Registration

M/S.Gas Links. Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Mary Richard Vs The District Collector

S.Mohamed Ibrahim Vs The Chief Executive Officer

Sasi Kumar Vs The District Revenue Officer

Shanmugam Satyanarayanan Vs Union of Inida