Back
: Issuance Not Limited By ₹5 Lakh Cap
In a significant ruling that eases bureaucratic hurdles for families settling estates, the has held that legal heirship certificates cannot be restricted by the value of the property involved. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas struck down the ₹5 lakh monetary ceiling prescribed in the Kerala Village Manual as irrational and without legal basis.
Breaking the Ceiling
The court declared that until the State enacts proper rules, Tahsildars are entitled to issue legal heirship certificates under regardless of the quantum of assets. The ruling came on a petition by Baby Kurian, an Overseas Citizen of India whose application for a of his deceased wife was repeatedly rejected.
The Case at Hand
Baby Kurian’s wife, Lissyamma Abraham, died in the United States in while the family was residing there. Though he submitted a family membership certificate from the Village Officer, the Tahsildar rejected his application citing practical difficulty in identifying of a person who had lived abroad for years. The appellate and revisional authorities upheld the rejection, also relying on the ₹5 lakh limit in the Village Manual.
A Gap in the Law
The court observed that there is no codified law governing legal heirship certificates. The only guidance comes from the Village Manual, which is not a statute but a set of administrative guidelines. While expressly allows persons who have roots in India—including those who have renounced citizenship—to apply, the lower authorities had ignored this provision.
Justice Thomas noted that legal heirship certificates merely identify who the are, without conferring . “Title to the properties of a deceased is determined by the or by in the form of a . is generally useful for ,” the court explained.
The court found the financial limit particularly problematic. “It is curious to note that a is tied to a financial limit. Legal heirship has no nexus with the quantum or value of property. A only identifies the . There cannot be a change in the status as a legal heir, merely on account of the quantum involved,” Justice Thomas wrote.
Key Observations
The court highlighted the everyday hardships faced by families. “Most authorities, governmental or private, insist upon production of a , when any change relating to the properties of a deceased person has to be carried out in the records. A common man is compelled to run from pillar to post, to incorporate such change of name in the records, after the death of a family member.”
It further observed that existing remedies like under the are limited to debts and securities, while certificates under the are capped at ₹10 lakh. “In cases where there are no disputes, there is still a vacuum, if the value of the property is more than rupees five lakhs.”
The Road Ahead
The court quashed the rejection orders against Baby Kurian and directed the Tahsildar to issue the within three months, taking into account the family relationship certificate already on record. It also issued a broader declaration that Tahsildars may issue such certificates under paragraph 236 of the Village Manual irrespective of the monetary value involved, until the State frames appropriate rules.
The court fervently urged the State Government to consider enacting a proper statutory provision governing the issuance of legal heirship certificates, noting the matter is “of utmost importance to the people of Kerala.”
