MADRAS HIGH COURT
VIJAYALAKSHMI VS. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
DATED : 13.12.2019
Summarised Judgement (Scroll for Complete Judgement)
Introduction:
This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in O.Mu.No.3669/2018/A3, dated 06/12/2018 and quash the same and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to issue Legal Heirship Certificate to the petitioners .
Facts of the Case:
The petitioners are the daughter and sons of late S.Bagvath Singh. The petitioners states that their father late S.Bagvath Singh had two wives and that through the first wife petitioners 1 to 3 were born and through second wife petitioners 4 to 6 were born. It is also stated that there is no dispute with regard to the status or relationship between the parties. It is the case of the petitioners that the first wife died long back and that their father married the second wife only after the death of the first wife. It is now admitted before this court that the second wife also died in the year 1999, even before the death of her husband. The Legal Heirship Certificate for the deceased second wife Raja Lakshmi is also produced before this Court to show that the petitioners 4 to 6 are her children.
When the application is submitted before the second respondent, the second respondent originally rejected the application on the ground that in respect of cases where there are more than one wife, the parties have to approach the Civil Court and they cannot approach the Tahsildar for issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur.
Observation of Court:
Since the deceased had more than one wife, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the Tahsildar cannot issue the Legal Heirship Certificate. From the facts admitted among the persons interested, it is made clear that the second marriage is also valid as it was contracted after the life time of first wife. Hence, Tahsildar can not treat this case where more than two wives are claiming Legal Heirship Certificate. When the validity of the second marriage and the status of second wife is admitted, the children of second wife namely petitioners 4 to 6 have to be treated as legitimate children born to Mr.S.Bagvath Singh.
Judgement:
Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the second respondent, dated 06.12.2018 is hereby quashed. The second respondent is directed to issue the Legal Heirship Certificate to the petitioners by stating the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
--------------------------------------------------
MADRAS HIGH COURT
VIJAYALAKSHMI VS. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
DATED : 13.12.2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 13.12.2019
CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
W.P.(MD).No.7600 of 2019
1.Vijayalakshmi
2.B.Sekar
3.B.Anandhan
4.B.Thirumaran
5.B.Thirumaran
6.B.Thangadurai
7.B.Senthilkumar .. Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Melur,
Office at Y.Othakadai, Madurai District.
2.The Tahsildar, Office of Tahsildar, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai. .. Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Senthil
For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in O.Mu.No.3669/2018/A3, dated 06/12/2018 and quash the same and consequently directing the 2nd respondent to issue Legal Heirship Certificate to the petitioners.
2.The petitioners are the daughter and sons of late S.Bagvath Singh. The petitioners states that their father late S.Bagvath Singh had two wives and that through the first wife petitioners 1 to 3 were born and through second wife petitioners 4 to 6 were born. It is also stated that there is no dispute with regard to the status or relationship between the parties. It is the case of the petitioners that the first wife died long back and that their father married the second wife only after the death of the first wife. It is now admitted before this court that the second wife also died in the year 1999, even before the death of her husband. The Legal Heirship Certificate for the deceased second wife Raja Lakshmi is also produced before this Court to show that the petitioners 4 to 6 are her children.
3.When the application is submitted before the second respondent, the second respondent originally rejected the application on the ground that in respect of cases where there are more than one wife, the parties have to approach the Civil Court and they cannot approach the Tahsildar for issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Melur.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, after recording the fact that there is no dispute among the petitioners as to the status and that the petitioners have no quarrel among themselves, remitted the matter to the second respondent to issue Legal Heirship Certificate as per the guidelines of the Land Commissioner. However, the second respondent after remand, once again passed the same order and rejected the application on the same ground, on which he had earlier rejected on 05.01.2018. The second rejection by order, dated 16.12.2018, is challenged in this writ petition.
4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents produced before this Court a Circular, dated 09.08.2017, giving certain directions to the Tahsildar concerned, for issuance of Legal Heirship Certificate. The general instructions as found in the circular are as follows:
5.Since the deceased had more than one wife, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the Tahsildar cannot issue the Legal Heirship Certificate. From the facts admitted among the persons interested, it is made clear that the second marriage is also valid as it was contracted after the life time of first wife. Hence, Tahsildar can not treat this case where more than two wives are claiming Legal Heirship Certificate. When the validity of the second marriage and the status of second wife is admitted, the children of second wife namely petitioners 4 to 6 have to be treated as legitimate children born to Mr.S.Bagvath Singh.
Applying the Hindu Succession Act, the claim of the petitioners as legal heirs of the deceased cannot be negatived by reference to the guidelines or circular issued by the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Land Administration. Since the relationship of the petitioners is not dispute, this Court is inclined to quash the order passed by the second respondent, dated 06.12.2018, dismissing the petition of the petitioners for issuing Legal Heirship Certificate of deceased S. Bagvath Singh.
6.Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the second respondent, dated 06.12.2018 is hereby quashed. The second respondent is directed to issue the Legal Heirship Certificate to the petitioners by stating the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Melur, Office at Y. Othakadai, Madurai District.
2.The Tahsildar, Office of Tahsildar, Madurai East Taluk, Madurai.
No comments:
Post a Comment