Disposed

Soundarya .P v. The Registrar

Madras HC3 Apr 2023WP(MD)/5989/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition directed the respondent to correct the husband's name in the petitioner's daughter's birth certificate and add the daughter's name. The single-judge bench noted that the entire issue required a thorough examination by the respondent and mandated issuance of a notice and document verification to be completed within six weeks before final disposition.

What did the court decide?

Issuance of notice to the petitioner, husband, and related persons with a direction to examine documents and complete the exercise within six weeks.

Soundarya .P Vs The Registrar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

P.Soundarya

... Petitioner

vs.

The Registrar Birth and Death Pudukkottai Municipality Pudukkottai ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent to put the correct name of the husband of the petitioner as Periyasamy instead of the wrong entry Annadurai in the birth certificate of the petitioner's daughter issued by respondent on 08.10.2020 and adding the name of the petitioner's daughter SEMMOZHI considering her representation dated 15.12.2022.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sevugaraja For Respondent : Mr.S.Kameshwaran Standing Counsel

¶13

_____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

¶17

This writ petition has been filed in the nature of mandamus

¶18

seeking a direction to the respondent to correct the name of her husband.

¶19

2. Let we not enter into a detailed discussion, since the entire issue has to be examined only by the respondent.

¶20

3. The petitioner had given a representation dated 15.12.2022 to the respondent. The petitioner also seeks addition of the name of her daughter Semmozhi.

¶21

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶22

5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent stated that the respondent would issue notice to the petitioner, her husband, every other persons, who are directly or indirectly connected with the family affairs of the petitioner and then examine the documents presented by the petitioner and also come to a subjective satisfaction regarding the issue raised by the petitioner and then pass necessary orders.

¶23

_____________ Page 2 of 4_

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

¶26

6. The above submission of the learned Standing Counsel is

¶27

recorded. However, the entire exercise must be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶28

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶29

03.04.2023

¶30

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶31

krk

¶32

Page 3 of 4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

¶35

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

¶36

krk

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.5989 of 2023

¶38

03.04.2023

¶39

_____________ Page 4 of 4_

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Soundarya .P v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soundarya .P v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Senthamilselvi. R Vs The District Registrar

Sri Mutharamman Middle School Vs The Director of Elementary Education

Murugesan. M Vs The Govt of Tamil Nadu

Aandiyappan Vs The Commissioner

Raman Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Munisamy. v Vs The District Collector