Disposed

Mahalakshmi v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC9 Jul 2024WP/18338/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An 83-year-old petitioner sought a mandamus directing the Revenue Division Officer to complete the enquiry on her representation under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The court, without entering the merits, directed the first respondent to consider the representation and pass orders within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to first respondent to consider representation dated 18.12.2023 and pass orders on merits within eight weeks; no costs.

Mahalakshmi Vs Revenue Divisional Officer — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED:09.07.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

Mahalakshmi

...Petitioner

1.Revenue Division Officer, North Madras Division, No.5698+V2X, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Puzhal, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600060

¶11

2.K.V.Balamanikandan

¶12

...Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶14

India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to compete the enquiry on the petition dated 18.12.2023 filed by the petitioner under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act-2007.

¶15

For Petitioner :M/s.K.Subhashini For Respondents : Mr.P.Gurunathan for R1

¶16

Additional Government Pleader

¶17

ORDER

¶18

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶20

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.12.2023.

¶21

In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel appearing for either side, this petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is aged about 83 years had executed a settlement deed to her son, second respondent herein on the promise that he will take care of her and will spend for medical expenses. But the fact remains that the second respondent failed to take care of the petitioner and causing physically harassment to the petitioner even without considering her health condition. Hence, the petitioner filed W.P.No.11561/2020 and after the receipt of notice from the High Court, her son came forward to cancel the said settlement deed and according the seetlement deed was cancelled by way of cancellation deed dated 11.09.2020, the same was registered as Doc.No.4508/2020 before the Sub Registrar's Office, Thiruvatriyur. Pursuant to which, the second respondent along with his wife causing physcial torture and mental trauma to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 18.12.2023 to the first respondent who in turn conducted enquiry

¶23

2/5

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶26

on 25.04.2024 by its letter dated 18.03.2024. After enquiry,

¶27

the 1^st respondent informed that he will call upon her son for further proceedings but till date no enquiry proceedings were conducted by the 1^st respondent and no orders was passed in the petitioner's representation. Hence this petition.

¶28

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would be suffice if this Court issues a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.12.2023 and pass orders.

¶29

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent submitted that they will consider the case of the petitioner and take action in the manner known to law.

¶30

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.12.2023 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight(8) weeks from the date of

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶34

receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed

¶36

of. No costs.

¶37

09.07.2024

¶38

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order msv

¶39

To The Revenue Division Officer, North Madras Division, No.5698+V2X, Mahalakshmi Nagar, Puzhal, Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600060

¶40

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶42

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN ,J.

¶43

msv

¶44

W.P.No.18338 of 2024

¶45

09.07.2024

¶46

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Mahalakshmi v. Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahalakshmi v. Revenue Divisional Officer

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

V.Revathi Vs the Government of Tmail Nadu

A.B.Venkatesan Vs the Joint Commissioner

T.Thamayanthi, Vs Tamilnadu Wakf Board

A.Duraisamy Vs the Assistant Commissioner

C.Bakkiyavathi Vs the Regional Transport Officer

K.Murugesan Vs the District Collector