IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 35626 of 2008(N)
1. ANOOP.A, S/O.LATE BABU VIJAYANATH,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE,
4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLELI BHAGOM,
5. SHYLAJA BABU, KALISSERIL (AMBIKA
For Petitioner :SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :03/12/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI, J
-------------------
W.P.(C).35626/2008
--------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is the son of one Babu Vijayanath now
deceased. It seems that marriage between the
petitioner’s father and his mother, Ajitha Kumari,
ended in divorce granted in that behalf by the Sub
Court, Kollam, in O.P.(HMA).No.46/1987. It seems
that the fifth respondent then started living with the
petitioner’s father. Though there is a dispute as to
religion and caste of the fifth respondent, same is not
strictly relevant in the instant case. Be that as it may,
it is admitted that two children were born to the fifth
respondent. Petitioner submits that his father and the
fifth respondent started living together without
marrying. Petitioner is aggrieved that extensive
properties which were held by his father are now seen
to have been transferred in favour of the fifth
respondent by some fabricated documents. Petitioner
submits that he has decided to approach the Civil
Court to avoid the same. But, in the meanwhile, on
W.P.(C).35626/2008
2
application made by the fifth respondent, Tahsildar has
purported to issue Ext.P5 which is styled as a certificate
showing fifth respondent and two minor children born
to the fifth respondent as legal heirs of late Babu
Vijayanath. Petitioner submits that he approached the
District Collector challenging Ext.P5 and this has been
met with Ext.P10 stating that the District Collector has
no power to interfere in the matter and that the parties
shall establish their status before the Civil Court.
Ext.P10 is under challenge in the writ petition.
2. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Government Pleader.
3. The dispute as to whether the fifth respondent or
any other person or the children are the legal heirs of
late Babu Vijayanath are matters which have to be
appropriately decided by the Civil Court. If the
petitioner challenges the same, it is open to the
petitioner to approach the Civil Court for a declaration as
W.P.(C).35626/2008
3
to the marital status (or absence of the same) vis-`-vis
the fifth respondent. These matters require elaborate
evidence and naturally this process can be undertaken
only by the Civil Court.
4. Certificate in the nature of Ext.P5 does not have
any statutory backing. If the petitioner disputes the
marital status of his father vis-a-vis the fifth respondent,
as stated above, his remedy lies before the Civil Court.
Subject to the above direction, writ petition is
disposed of.
V.GIRI,
Judge
mrcs