SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Ker) 1015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
Suseela, W/o. Rajendran & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
State of Kerala, Represented by Secretary, Revenue Department, Government Secretariat & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 1293 of 2023
Decided On : 12-09-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: T.D. Susmith Kumar, T.O. Deepa, C. Sivadas.
For the Respondent: Smt. Vidya Kuriakose[GP].

IMPORTANT POINT
An investigation into the whereabouts of a missing person is necessary before granting a Legal Heirship Certificate.

Headnote:

Legal Heirship Certificate - Missing Person - The court held that a Legal Heirship Certificate can only be granted if there is a legally sanctioned presumption possible or if it is factually assessed that the missing person is no more. The court directed the petitioners to register an FIR and instructed the police to investigate the whereabouts of the missing person before considering the issuance of a Legal Heirship Certificate.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners seek a Legal Heirship Certificate for their missing husband. The government pleader argued that without concrete evidence of the missing person's status, the certificate cannot be granted.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that an investigation into the whereabouts of the missing person is necessary before granting a Legal Heirship Certificate.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were entitled to obtain a Legal Heirship Certificate for their missing husband without a 'Man Missing Certificate'.

Ratio Decidendi: The court decided that an enquiry by the police is required to establish the missing person's status before considering the issuance of a Legal Heirship Certificate.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the petitioners were directed to register an FIR and the police were instructed to investigate the whereabouts of the missing person before considering the issuance of a Legal Heirship Certificate.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioners seek that competent among the respondents be directed to issue them a Legal Heirship Certificate because, the husband of the first among them – Sri. Rajendran, has been missing as early as from 20.06.2002. They say that Sri. Rajendran left home usually on the afore date, but never returned; and that, even though First Information Reports (FIR) were registered by their relatives, it do not bear any fruit. They say that, therefore, they are now entitled to obtain a Legal Heirship Certificate with respect to him and that the Authorities are obligated to grant it, without insisting on a “Man Missing Certificate”.

2. The afore submissions of Smt. T.O. Deepa – learned counsel for the petitioners, were answered by Smt. Vidya Kuriakose – learned Government Pleader, saying that as long as there is nothing concrete to establish that Sri. Rajendran is missing and that he is perhaps not alive, a Legal Heirship Certificate, as requested by the petitioners, cannot be granted. She explained that even though the petitioners say that an FIR was registered by their relatives, nothing has been placed on record; and that, as per her instructions, no such has been registered. She submitted that, therefore, she leaves this Court to issue appropriate orders.

3. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is evident that a Legal Heirship Certificate can be granted only if there is a legally sanctioned presumption possible, or if it is factually assessed that Sri. Rajendran is now no more. For this, certainly, an enquiry is required to be done by the Police, which does not appear to be done until now.

4. This Court is persuaded to say as afore because, it is certainly possible that Sri. Rajendran is still available somewhere, perhaps being without the capacity to contact the petitioners for some reason; and it is, therefore, in their interest also that he is traced out, if possible.

In the afore circumstances, this writ petition is allowed with the following directions :

    (a) I direct the petitioners to register an FIR with the jurisdictional Police Station within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment as regards the factum of Sri. Rajendran being missing from 20.06.2022.

(b) The Station House Officer of the jurisdictional Police Station will, thereupon, cause an investigation into the whereabouts of Sri. Rajendran and will complete the same within a period of one month thereafter.

(c) On completion of the enquiry as afore and based on the report to be issued to the petitioners by the Police, they will be at full liberty to approach the 4th respondent – Tahsildar, for issuance of a Legal Heirship Certificate; which shall then be considered in terms of law and if they are found entitled, to be issued to them within a period of one month from the date on which such request is made.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top