Kerala High Court
Jyothi Mary Jacob vs The Tahasildar on 1 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
PETITIONERS:
1 JYOTHI MARY JACOB
AGED 46 YEARS
W/O. THE LATE SUJIN MATHEW GEORGE, R/O. 54/2549,
VRINDAVAN COLONY, ELAMKULAM, ERNAKULAM-19.
2 GEORGE MATHEW MANNIL,
AGED 20 YEARS
S/O. THE LATE SUJIN MATHEW GEORGE, R/O. 54/2549,
VRINDAVAN COLONY, ELAMKULAM, ERNAKULAM-19.
3 GEORGE MATHEW,
AGED 79 YEARS
S/O. MANNIL GEE VARGHESE MATHEW, MANNIL PUTHEN
PURAYIL, MULAKUZHA (PART) MULAKUZHA, ALAPPUZHA,
KERALA-689505.
4 ANNAMMA GEORGE,
AGED 79 YEARS
W/O. GEORGE MATHEW, MANNIL PUTHEN PURAYIL, MULAKUZHA
(PART) MULAKUZHA, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA-689505.
BY ADVS.
SRI.MADHU RADHAKRISHNAN
SRI.NELSON JOSEPH
SRI.M.D.JOSEPH
SHRI.DEEPAK ASHOK KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE TAHASILDAR
KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM-11.
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM-11.
SMT.PRINCY XAVIER, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 01st day of February 2021
The petitioners 1 and 2 are the wife and son of
the deceased Sujin Mathew George and petitioners 3
and 4 are the father and mother respectively of
late Sujin Mathew George. It is stated that the 3 rd
petitioner had submitted an application for Legal
Heirship certificate. Based on the said
application, the 1st respondent issued Ext.P1 Legal
Heirship certificate on 12.08.2013 including all
the petitioners as legal heirs. Relationship
Certificate is also issued along with that. Sujin
Mathew George died intestate on 23.11.2012. The
petitioners came to know that as per Indian
Succession Act, 1925, the legal heirs of late Sujin
Mathew George would only be the wife and son and
the father and mother cannot be the legal heirs of
the deceased as long as the wife and son are alive.
On noticing this defect in this legal Heirship
Certificate, the 1st petitioner submitted Ext.P2
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
application for correction in the Legal Heirship
Certificate on 17.11.2020 by producing Ext.P3
consent letter of the petitioners 3 and 4 who are
the parents of the deceased. The 1st respondent
rejected the said application as per Ext.P4 letter
stating that he does not have any authority to
correct the Legal Heirship Certificate as the said
certificate was issued after publication in the
gazette calling for objections. So, he advised the
1st petitioner to approach the Civil court, relying
on Ext.P5 Government Order dated 31.7.2009 which
refers to provisions contained in paragraph 261 of
Kerala Village Manual.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner
points out that the provision contained in
paragraph 261 of Kerala Village Manual refers to a
case where there is a dispute. In the present case
there is no dispute and the consent of the parents
of the deceased was already furnished and therefore
the 1st respondent is having the authority to
correct.
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that
the Tahsildar does not have any authority to review
his orders especially when the Legal Heirship
Certificate is issued after calling for objections
and publication in the gazette. It is also pointed
out that the Legal Heirship Certificate was issued
on 12.08.2013 and application for correction was
submitted on 17.11.2020 after a period of more than
7 years. Therefore, the Tahsildar can not be said
to have any power to correct the same.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners as well as the learned Government
Pleader.
5. It is an admitted fact that the parents of
the deceased Sujin Mathew George can not be his
legal heirs in tune with Section 33 of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925. In the present case parents
who are included in Ext.P1 Legal Heirship
Certificate has also approached this Court along
with the wife and son of the deceased for
correction of the Legal Heirship Certificate and
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
for issuance of the same in accordance with the
provisions contained in the Act.
6. Therefore, there shall be a direction to
the 1st respondent to issue a certificate in
accordance with the provisions contained in Section
33 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, including
the petitioners 1 and 2 alone in the Legal Heirship
Certificate. Ext.P1 Legal Heirship Certificate
shall stand set aside for enabling the 1 st
respondent to issue Legal Heirship Certificate in
accordance with law. Further publication would not
be necessary in the present case as the petitioners
3 and 4 has already joined in this writ petition
and there was no objection in the original
proceedings from anybody. Such a certificate shall
be issued within a period of 'one month' from the
date receipt of a copy of the judgment.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA
JUDGE
DM
WP(C).No.339 OF 2021(N)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP
CERTIFICATE DATED 12.8.2013 ISSUED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
17.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER
TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DATED
18.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD AND 4TH
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A5-18815/2020
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 18.12.2020.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER
NO.18939/T2/2008/REVENUE DATED
31.7.2009.
RESPONDENTS EXIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
