Disposed¶37

Sirumaniyammal a v. The District Collector

Madras HC11 Dec 2025WP(MD)/31877/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD)No.31877 of 2025; decided 11.12.2025 by R.Vijayakumar J.; legal heir certificate; second wife seeking inclusion of her sons Glarance Kiruba and Hentry Jerold; first wife Tamilselvi named in certificate with son Ebisilvester; deceased Amalraj died 15.10.2020; Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872; Revenue Divisional Officer Srirangam; representation dated 10.09.2025; RDO order dated 27.10.2025; petitioner relegated to competent Civil Court; writ petition disposed of; no costs.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; the writ petition was disposed of with an observation that the petitioner, if claiming any better right than the 4th respondent, may approach the competent Civil Court. No costs. ¶37

Sirumaniyammal a Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; the writ petition was disposed of with an observation that the petitioner, if claiming any better right than the 4th respondent, may approach the competent Civil Court. No costs.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the legal heir certificate Pa.Mu. No.Aa4/2026/2022 dated 10.05.2022, issued in favour of the 4th respondent as wife of the deceased Amalraj and naming Ebisilvester as son, ought to be cancelled. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

On the affidavit averments, the 4th respondent is the first wife of the deceased Amalraj and the writ petitioner is the second wife; the parties are admittedly governed by the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. Accordingly, the legal heir certificate issued in favour of the 4th respondent and Ebisilvester (born to the 4th respondent through the deceased) cannot be found fault with.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner claims any better right than the 4th respondent, it is for her to approach the competent Civil Court; on that basis, with these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of with no costs.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 sought to cancel a legal heir certificate dated 10.05.2022 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam, in favour of the 4th respondent as wife of the deceased Amalraj (died 15.10.2020) and her son Ebisilvester, and to issue a fresh certificate including the petitioner (who claims to have married the deceased on 21.01.2010) and her two sons, Glarance Kiruba and Hentry Jerold, on her representation dated 10.09.2025. HELD: The affidavit averments show the 4th respondent to be the first wife and the petitioner the second wife; the parties are admittedly governed by the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872; the legal heir certificate in favour of the 4th respondent and Ebisilvester cannot be found fault with. If the petitioner claims any better right, she must approach the competent Civil Court (the RDO having also, by order dated 27.10.2025, directed her to the Civil Court). Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.31877 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 11.12.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.31877 of 2025

A.Sirumaniyammal

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, District Collectorate, Trichy.

¶11

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Srirangam, Trichy District.

¶12

The Tahsildhar, Manapparai Taluk Office, Trichy District.

¶13

Tamilselvi ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to cancel the legal heir certificate in Pa.Mu. No.Aa4/2026/2022 dated 10.05.2022 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to issue a fresh Legal heir Certificate including the petitioners sons name Glarance Kiruba and Hentry Jerold on the basis of consider her representation dated 10.09.2025.

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.31877 of 2025

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arun Raj For R1 to R3 : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia Special Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.T.Naveen Sundar

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the legal

¶21

heir certificate issued by the 2^nd respondent and to issue a fresh legal heir certificate including the petitioner's sons name namely Glarance Kiruba and Hentry Jerold, on the basis of the representation of the petitioner dated 10.09.2025.

¶22

One Mr.Amalraj had passed away on 15.10.2020. A legal heir certificate has been issued by the 2^nd respondent on 10.05.2022, referring to the name of the 4^th respondent as his wife and one Ebisilvester as his son.

¶23

A perusal of the affidavit reveals that the writ petitioner is said to

¶24

have married the deceased Amalraj on 21.01.2010 and two sons namely Glarance Kiruba and Hentry Jerold were born to them. It is further averred in paragraph 3 of the writ affidavit that only in the year 2022, she came to

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

4 th

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.31877 of 2025

¶29

know about the fact that the deceased Amalraj had married the 4^th respondent in the year 1997. The averments in the affidavit would clearly reveal that the 4^th respondent is the first wife of the deceased Amalraj and the writ petitioner is the second wife. Admittedly the parties are governed by Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872.

¶30

In view of the above said facts, the order of the 2^nd respondent to issue the legal heir certificate in favour of the 4^th respondent and one Ebisilvester born to the 4^th respondent through the deceased Amalraj cannot be found fault with. In case, if the petitioner claims any better right than the 4^th respondent, it is for her to approach the competent Civil Court.

¶31

It is also brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner has given a representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer seeking to include her name and her sons name in the legal heir certificate and the order has also been passed on 27.10.2025, directing the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court.

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.31877 of 2025

¶35

In view of the above said facts, if the petitioner claims any better right than the 4^th respondent, it is for her to approach the competent Civil Court.

¶36