Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 1516 Mad
Judgement Date : 22 January, 2021
W.A.No.34 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.01.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.A.No.34 of 2021
Saraswathy Johnson,
Executive Director,
VRTC for Blind, Habowal Road,
Opp/Kitchulu Nagar,
Ludhiana, Punjab. ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045.
2.The Tahsildar,
Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045.
3.E.Samuel Babu Jayakumar
4.Christudoss Premkumar ... Respondents
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
order dated 01.9.2020 made in W.P.No.6731 of 2017.
__________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.34 of 2021
For Appellant : Mr.M.Velmurugan
For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Suresh
Government Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 and 2
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The appeal is directed against an order of September 1, 2020
passed on a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution lodged by
the third respondent to the proceedings.
2. There is a dispute between the writ petitioners and the
appellant herein. The writ petitioners claim to be the heirs through the
first wife of one Edward Martin Johnson. The appellant herein claims
to be the legally married wife of the said Edward Martin Johnson. The
appellant has obtained a legal heirship certificate dated October 10,
2005 and has purported to deal with some of the properties standing
in the name of the deceased.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.34 of 2021
3. Upon noticing the nature of the disputes between the principal
dramatis personae, the writ Court was pleased to relegate the matter
to a civil Court. In addition, since the appellant herein purported to
steal a march on the basis of the legal heir certificate, such certificate
was kept in abeyance or cancelled.
4. The appellant submits that even if the principal issue between
the private parties has been rightly relegated to a suit, the legal heir
certificate ought not to have been cancelled.
5. Since the relevant certificate, if left outstanding, would permit
the appellant herein to deal with the properties of the deceased even
before any suit which may be instituted by the private respondents
herein may be heard or decreed, the approach of the writ Court cannot
be faulted. There does not appear to be any infirmity in the order
impugned.
6. Accordingly, W.A.No.34 of 2021 is dismissed. There will be no
order as to costs. It is recorded that the appellant says that the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.34 of 2021
private respondents have already approached the civil Court.
Consequently, C.M.P.No.445 of 2021 is closed.
(S.B., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.)
22.01.2021
Index : No
bbr
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045.
2.The Tahsildar, Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.34 of 2021
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
bbr
W.A.No.34 of 2021
22.01.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!