Disposed

Muthumari v. the Thasildar

Madras HC9 Apr 2021WP(MD)/2397/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the Thasildar, Peraiyur Taluk, to consider a petitioner's representation for correcting names in her husband's death certificate and legal heir certificate within eight weeks, on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation regarding certificate corrections and provide a decision within eight weeks; petitioner to submit fresh representation with docu

Muthumari Vs the Thasildar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.2397 of 2021

¶2

Muthumari

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.04.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.(MD)No.2397 of 2021

¶4

.. Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The Thasildar, Peraiyur Taluk, Peraiyur, Madurai District. .. Respondent

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to correct the petitioner husband father name is Mariyappan instead of Karuppan and mother name is Mookkayee instead of Karuppi in the Death Certificate of the petitioner husband Mahalingam, dated 21.10.2012 and also in the Legal Heir Certificate, dated 04.06.2014 and reissuing both the certificates.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugappan

¶9

For Respondent : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar, Special Government Pleader.

¶10

¶11

ORDER

¶12

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 08.01.2021, wherein the petitioner has sought for the correction of the names in the legal heir certificate that was issued by the respondent on 04.06.2014 and also the death certificate that was issued on 21.12.2012.

¶13

Heard Mr.R.Murugappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶14

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for in this Writ Petition, there shall be a direction to the respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 08.01.2021, and deal with the same on its own merits and in accordance with law and take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

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

¶16

1/2

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.2397 of 2021

¶18

The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the respondent along with all the relevant documents and also a copy of this order.

¶19

This Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar (RTI ACT)

¶22

// True Copy //

¶23

/ /2021

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

vsm

¶26

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 Note : pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate / litigant concerned.

¶27

¶28

The Thasildar, Peraiyur Taluk, Peraiyur, Madurai District.

¶29

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-15813[F] dated 15/04/2021 )

¶30

W.P.(MD)No.2397 of 2021 09.04.2021

¶31

RK (27.04.2021) 2P 3C

¶32

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

¶33

2/2

Muthumari v. the Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthumari 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

Murugan. K Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Murugesan Vs the District Collector

M.v.L.Mohan @ Manikandan, Vs the District Revenue Officer

Sultan Badsa.M.a Vs The District Collector

Dorothy Manimuthu Vs the Secretary to the Govt

Jeyaprakash.a.Kr Vs the Commissioner of Land Administration