Petitioner filed a writ seeking quashing of an order and direction to issue a legal heirship certificate for her deceased husband. The court held the cause of action no longer existed and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
The writ petition and connected miscellaneous petition were dismissed as infructuous; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
2024:MHC:5795
WP No.4498 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12-01-2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM
WP No.4498 of 2018 And WMP No.5525 of 2018
Mrs.D.Kasthuri
.. Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Taluk Office, Egmore Taluk, Chennai-600 031.
2.The Tahsildar, Egmore Taluk, Chennai-600 031.
3.Mrs.Radha
4.Mr.Akilesh Balaji [R-3 and R-4 impleaded vide order of Court dated 07.02.2019 made in WMP No.7793 of 2018 in WP 4498 of 2018] .. Respondents
Page 1 of 4
WP No.4498 of 2018
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent resulting in the impugned order in O.Mu.E4/6193/2017 dated 11.12.2017 and quash the same and direct the second respondent to issue legal heirship certificate of the petitioner's husband late S.Krishnasamy to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.A.Akbar
For Respondents-1 and 2: Mr.P.Bala Thandayutham, Special Government Pleader.
For Respondents-3 and 4: Not Ready in Notice
O R D E R
The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission before this Court that the cause aroused for the purpose filing the writ petition did not exist as of now. Thus no further adjudication needs to entertained in respect of the grounds raised in the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner also made an endorsement to the said Page 2 of 4
WP No.4498 of 2018
effect in the bundle.
made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
12-01-2024
Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No Svn
To
Page 3 of 4
WP No.4498 of 2018
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn
WP 4498 of 2018
12-01-2024
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition stands appropriate for adjudication when the petitioner no longer has a cause of action.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mrs. D. Kasthuri
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Taluk Office, Egmore Taluk, Chennai-600 031
The Tahsildar, Egmore Taluk, Chennai-600 031
Mrs. Radha
Mr. Akilesh Balaji
S.M. Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
