In K. Vijayapandian Vs The President, The District Legal Services Authority, Virudhunagar & 5 Ors., [W.P. (MD) No. 388 of 2020], the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has reiterated that there can never be a compromise in a case dealing with declaring the status of a person, which has to be established only by adducing evidence.
CASE SUMMARY
FACTS:
The case of the Petitioner is that one Mr. Natarajan transferred the subject property in favour of the Petitioner and later died issueless. While so, the 4th Respondent filed a suit before the Principal District Munsif Court, Srivilliputhur, for a declaration that she is the legal heir of the deceased Natarajan and for other consequential reliefs. The suit was filed against the Tahsildar, Srivilliputhur and the District Collector, Virudhunagar District. The matter was referred to the Lok Adalat and before the District Legal Services Authority, an Award came to be passed. In this Award, the Tahsildar had agreed to issue Legal Heirship Certificate, by showing the 4th, 5th and 6th Respondents as legal heirs of the deceased Natarajan. Based on the same, the Award came to be passed on 14.07.2018.
The grievance of the Petitioner is that based on the award, the 4th – 6th Respondents started causing hindrance to the Petitioner and were attempting to grab the property. The Petitioner filed a suit before the District Munsif Court, Kodaikanal, seeking to declare the settlement deed and the sale deed executed by the 4th – 6th Respondents as null and void and for a permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. The Petitioner then filed this Writ Petition challenging the Lok Adalat Award.
DECISION OF THE COURT:
Writ Petition allowed and the matter is remanded to the file of the Principal District Munsif, Srivilliputhur with a direction to decide the suit on merits and accordance with law. It was left open to the Petitioner to implead himself as one of the Defendants in the suit and put forth his case.
REASONS:
- The 4th Respondent has claimed to be the legal heir of the deceased Natarajan. This status cannot be conferred on the 4th Respondent by the Tahsildar. It is a matter to be proved before the competent Court.
- The Award that was passed by the District Legal Services Authority is illegal on the face of it. The authority did not take into account the fact that there can never be a compromise in a case dealing with declaring the status of a person, which has to be established only by adducing evidence and in the instant case, this status has been conferred by recording the stand taken by the Tahsildar as if the 4th to 6th Respondents are the legal heirs of the deceased Natarajan.
COUNSELS:
For Petitioner: Mr. Shankar Ganesh;
For R1 & R3: Mr. B. Saravanan, AGP;
Date of Judgment: 03.10.2023
(This is a judgment summary and not an opinion piece.)
Comments