1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Writ Appeal(MD)No.305 of 2011 1.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. 2.The Registrar of Births & Deaths, Corporation of Madurai, Madurai. : Appellants/Respondents Vs. Subasri, W/o.Murugesan :Respondent/Petitioner PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order of the learned Single Judge, dated 31.03.2010, made in W.P.(MD) No.4147/2010. Prayer in W.P.(MD).No.4147/2010: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings HS/35171/10 dated 09.03.2010 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the second respondent to register the birth of her adopted Child viz. M.Sworna Priya, aged 9 years in compliance of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.4, Madurai in Crl.MP.No.7085 of 2008 dated 17.11.2009 within a period that may be stipulated by this Court. For Appellants : Mr.M.Jothi Basu For Respondent : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J] This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 31.03.2010 made in W.P.(MD)No.4147 of 2010, wherein the respondent herein challenged the order of the 1st respondent, dated 09.03.2010, and prayed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to register the birth of her adopted child viz. M.Sworna Priya, aged 9 years, in compliance of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, in Crl.M.P.No.7085 of 2008, dated 17.11.2009. The learned Single Judge, taking note of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, dated 17.11.2009, in accordance with Section 13 of the Registration of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969, directed the appellants herein to register the date of birth of the said adopted daughter of the respondent in terms of the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, on 17.11.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2.The only point urged by the learned counsel for the appellant in this writ appeal is that the Government of India has issued a Circular on 14.07.1999 stating that the date of birth entry can be directed to be registered by the local Magistrate and in this case, the adoption of the child having taken place at Coimbatore, the direction issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, to the appellants is not proper. 3.In answer to the said submission, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that before passing of the order by the learned Judicial Magistrate, public notice was issued and the 2nd appellant was shown as the respondent in the said Criminal Miscellaneous Petition before the learned Judicial Magistrate and having not pleaded the said point and raised any objection, the appellants are prevented from raising such an objection at this distance of time on the principle of estoppel by conduct. 4.We have perused the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate In paragraph 3 of the said order, it is stated as follows: "In pursuance of the order of this court, the petitioner made publication Exhibit P4 in Malai Malar News daily calling for objection from the public to this petition. Despite such publication nobody has come forward to raise any objection. Apart from this the respondent has given no objection to allow this petition vide their reply Exhibit P5. Exhibit P3 is the 24.05.2004 dated the deed of adoption. Exhibit P2 is the Copy of the order issued by the Hon'ble I Additional District Judge, Madurai vide H.A.O.P.No.4/2003 dated 14.06.2004. The petitioner has paid necessary fee for registration of birth Vide Chalan Exhibit P2. Exhibit P6 is copy of the Bonafide Certificate issued by Sri Aurobindo Mira Matriculation Higher Secondary School for the petitioner's adopted child. Exhibit P1 is the xerox copy of Ration Card of the petitioner. The birth was not registered so far. Under this circumstance, this court finds all merit in this petition and concludes to allow this petition." 5.It is evident from the said extracted portion of the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate that the 2nd respondent has not raised any objection regarding the said aspect and therefore the appellants are estopped from raising such a contention on the principle of estoppel by conduct. 6.Section 13 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, nowhere states that a particular Magistrate should order for registration of date of birth, thereby clearly meaning the jurisdictional Magistrate. However, in this case, adoption has taken place pursuant to the decree passed in H.A.O.P. No.4 of 2003, dated 14.06.2004, which was passed by the I- Additional District Judge, Madurai. Therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge giving direction to the appellants to register the respondent's daughter's date of birth in the Birth Register is just and proper and we do not find any reason to interfere with the said order. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7.Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. The appellants are directed to comply with the order of the learned Single Judge within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. 2.The Registrar of Births & Deaths, Corporation of Madurai, Madurai. +1cc to Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Advocate SR.No.11243 +1cc to Mr.M.Jothi Basu, Advocate SR.No.11160 JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.305 of 2011 Dated:03.03.2011 gb PA/16.03.2011/3P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/