IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DECEMBER 2008 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35626 of 2008(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANOOP.A, S/O.LATE BABU VIJAYANATH, RESIDING AT NADAYIL KIZHAKKETHIL, MUZHANGODI, KALLELIBHAGOM, THODIYOOR P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 568. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLELI BHAGOM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. SHYLAJA BABU, KALISSERIL (AMBIKA VILASAM), PAIKUZHI, OACHIRA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY GP SMT.SUDHA DEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 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-à-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