W.P.No.7742 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.08.2026 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.No.7742 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.8351 of 2026 G.N.Senthil Kumar (a) Senthil Sambavan .. Petitioner Versus 1. District Revenue Officer, Chennai District, Singaravelar Maligai, Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Rd, George Town, Chennai – 600 001. 2. Revenue Divisional Officer, North Madras, Gandhi Main Road, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 3. The Tahsildhar, Purasaiwalkam Taluk Office, No.3, Raja Muthiah Rd, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. 4. S.D.Senthil Kumar 5. Sampath Kumar 6. Velankanni 7. Amul 8. Chandramohan 9. Santhosh Kumar 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 10. K.Elavarasi 11. M.Indumathi 12. K.Munusami 13. S.Narayanan 14. Palalyam 15. B.Kavitha 16. P.Usha 17. Seetha .. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent, in his proceedings Se.Mu.A.No. U6/06/2025 dated 24.12.2025, quash the same, and consequentially direct the 3rd respondent to restore the Legal Heirship Certificate vide Certificate No.TN-7202206241425, dated 08.07.2022, granted in favor of the family of the petitioners. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sundaresan For Respondents : Mrs.Inthu Karunakaran, Special Government Pleader, for RR-1 to 3

: Mr.V.Jeyaprakasham, for R4 : Mr.S.Arokiamaniraj, for R5 : No appearance, for RR-6 to 17 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 ORDER The prayer in this Writ Petition is challenging the order, dated 24.12.2025 and consequently, direct the third respondent to restore the Legal Heirship Certificate vide certificate No.TN-7202206241425, dated 08.07.2022. 2. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perusing the affidavit filed in support of the petition and other material records of the case, as per the genealogy filed by the petitioner, Indhrani, Poosamal and Lakshmi Ammal, claimed to be the children of one V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and being the legal heirs, they claim right to the property mentioned in the schedule to the stay application namely, the property in S.No.457, measuring an extent of 4 acres and 72 cents. As per the same, when they had furnished all the particulars, earlier, the aforementioned Legal Heirship Certificate was granted to them. While so, on application by the fourth respondent without any proper opportunity whatsoever and on enquiry, the second respondent cancelled the Legal Heirship Certificate. Aggrieved by the same, they had approached the first respondent. Now, by the impugned order, the first respondent has also confirmed the order of cancellation and dismissed the appeal filed by the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 petitioner.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the original order is passed without granting opportunity to the petitioner, the appeal ought to have been allowed. Secondly, the information furnished by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 is taken to be correct while not providing adequate opportunity to let in evidence to the petitioners. As a matter of fact, when due Death Certificates, as well as the Legal Heirship Certificates of the other persons, to whom the petitioner succeed, were all placed, only based on certain discrepancies with reference to age, the cancellation is done. It is common knowledge in our country that when an elderly person dies, normally, age is not exactly given and for the mistake of filing incorrect particulars, the very family tree itself is doubted. As a matter of fact, when the respondent Nos.4 and 5 claimed to have constructed a house and living in the property, it is the petitioner who had received the notice in the address and participated in the proceedings. In view thereof, the impugned order is unsustainable and as such, the Writ Petition is liable to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned Special Government Pleader for the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that as far as the appeal filed before the first respondent is concerned, due notice had been issued to both sides and the statement of both sides were recorded and all the documents have been duly considered and the order of cancellation has been confirmed for three reasons. Firstly, all bogus documents have been given which would be clear from the age difference between the alleged mother and the daughter and therefore, the same is cancelled. Secondly, the statement of the other side and the petitioner was considered and it was concluded that the particulars were wrong. Thirdly, considering the yet another proceedings, dated 28.12.2023, by which also the document is cancelled, the cancellation was upheld. 5. The learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.4 and 5 would submit that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property. They have constructed a house and are living there. They are only the correct legal heirs of V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and the respondent Nos.4 to 17 are now claiming falsely only to grab the property. Already, the petitioner has filed a Civil Suit in O.S.No.497 of 2026 which is pending on the file of the learned District Judge, Chengalpattu and the parties are contesting the matter. It can be seen from the Death Certificates produced by the 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

petitioner that the daughter Lakshmi is 2 years elder than the mother Chellammal. Similarly, the age difference between the other daughter and the mother is only 7 years. Thus, even as per the Death Certificates, on the face of it, false documents have been produced and the Legal Heirship Certificate has been obtained and therefore it is rightly cancelled. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side perused the material records of the case. 7. As held by the Full Bench of this Court, the Legal Heirship Certificate is neither the conclusive document to prove that a person is the legal heir nor it can be the decisive factor with reference to inheritance. It is a relationship certificate based on prima facie evidence that is granted by the authorities based on the Government Order in that regard. In this case, serious disputes have been raised by both sides claiming to be the lineal descendants of the said V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and the parties are already before the Civil Court in O.S.No.497 of 2026. It is for both parties to let in appropriate evidence and to convince the Civil Court that they are the lineal descendants/legal heirs to claim right over the property in question from the said V.V.Sadayan. Therefore, keeping open the rights of 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

the parties to agitate the matter before the Civil Court, before which O.S.No.497 of 2026 is pending, the grounds raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner need not be considered and the matter need not be remanded back to the official respondents to reconsider the issue once again. 8. Accordingly, keeping open the liberty of both parties to agitate the issue before the Civil Court, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20.08.2026 Neutral Citation : no grs To 1. The District Revenue Officer, Chennai District, Singaravelar Maligai, Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Rd, George Town, Chennai – 600 001. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, North Madras, Gandhi Main Road, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. grs 3. The Tahsildhar, Purasaiwalkam Taluk Office, No.3, Raja Muthiah Rd, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. W.P.No.7742 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.8351 of 2026 20.08.2026 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.7742 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.08.2026 CORAM : THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.No.7742 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.8351 of 2026 G.N.Senthil Kumar (a) Senthil Sambavan .. Petitioner Versus 1. District Revenue Officer, Chennai District, Singaravelar Maligai, Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Rd, George Town, Chennai – 600 001. 2. Revenue Divisional Officer, North Madras, Gandhi Main Road, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 3. The Tahsildhar, Purasaiwalkam Taluk Office, No.3, Raja Muthiah Rd, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. 4. S.D.Senthil Kumar 5. Sampath Kumar 6. Velankanni 7. Amul 8. Chandramohan 9. Santhosh Kumar 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 10. K.Elavarasi 11. M.Indumathi 12. K.Munusami 13. S.Narayanan 14. Palalyam 15. B.Kavitha 16. P.Usha 17. Seetha .. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent, in his proceedings Se.Mu.A.No. U6/06/2025 dated 24.12.2025, quash the same, and consequentially direct the 3rd respondent to restore the Legal Heirship Certificate vide Certificate No.TN-7202206241425, dated 08.07.2022, granted in favor of the family of the petitioners. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sundaresan For Respondents : Mrs.Inthu Karunakaran, Special Government Pleader, for RR-1 to 3

: Mr.V.Jeyaprakasham, for R4 : Mr.S.Arokiamaniraj, for R5 : No appearance, for RR-6 to 17 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 ORDER The prayer in this Writ Petition is challenging the order, dated 24.12.2025 and consequently, direct the third respondent to restore the Legal Heirship Certificate vide certificate No.TN-7202206241425, dated 08.07.2022. 2. Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perusing the affidavit filed in support of the petition and other material records of the case, as per the genealogy filed by the petitioner, Indhrani, Poosamal and Lakshmi Ammal, claimed to be the children of one V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and being the legal heirs, they claim right to the property mentioned in the schedule to the stay application namely, the property in S.No.457, measuring an extent of 4 acres and 72 cents. As per the same, when they had furnished all the particulars, earlier, the aforementioned Legal Heirship Certificate was granted to them. While so, on application by the fourth respondent without any proper opportunity whatsoever and on enquiry, the second respondent cancelled the Legal Heirship Certificate. Aggrieved by the same, they had approached the first respondent. Now, by the impugned order, the first respondent has also confirmed the order of cancellation and dismissed the appeal filed by the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 petitioner.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the original order is passed without granting opportunity to the petitioner, the appeal ought to have been allowed. Secondly, the information furnished by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 is taken to be correct while not providing adequate opportunity to let in evidence to the petitioners. As a matter of fact, when due Death Certificates, as well as the Legal Heirship Certificates of the other persons, to whom the petitioner succeed, were all placed, only based on certain discrepancies with reference to age, the cancellation is done. It is common knowledge in our country that when an elderly person dies, normally, age is not exactly given and for the mistake of filing incorrect particulars, the very family tree itself is doubted. As a matter of fact, when the respondent Nos.4 and 5 claimed to have constructed a house and living in the property, it is the petitioner who had received the notice in the address and participated in the proceedings. In view thereof, the impugned order is unsustainable and as such, the Writ Petition is liable to be allowed. 4. Per contra, learned Special Government Pleader for the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

respondent Nos.1 to 3 would submit that as far as the appeal filed before the first respondent is concerned, due notice had been issued to both sides and the statement of both sides were recorded and all the documents have been duly considered and the order of cancellation has been confirmed for three reasons. Firstly, all bogus documents have been given which would be clear from the age difference between the alleged mother and the daughter and therefore, the same is cancelled. Secondly, the statement of the other side and the petitioner was considered and it was concluded that the particulars were wrong. Thirdly, considering the yet another proceedings, dated 28.12.2023, by which also the document is cancelled, the cancellation was upheld. 5. The learned Counsel for the respondent Nos.4 and 5 would submit that they are in possession and enjoyment of the property. They have constructed a house and are living there. They are only the correct legal heirs of V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and the respondent Nos.4 to 17 are now claiming falsely only to grab the property. Already, the petitioner has filed a Civil Suit in O.S.No.497 of 2026 which is pending on the file of the learned District Judge, Chengalpattu and the parties are contesting the matter. It can be seen from the Death Certificates produced by the 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

petitioner that the daughter Lakshmi is 2 years elder than the mother Chellammal. Similarly, the age difference between the other daughter and the mother is only 7 years. Thus, even as per the Death Certificates, on the face of it, false documents have been produced and the Legal Heirship Certificate has been obtained and therefore it is rightly cancelled. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side perused the material records of the case. 7. As held by the Full Bench of this Court, the Legal Heirship Certificate is neither the conclusive document to prove that a person is the legal heir nor it can be the decisive factor with reference to inheritance. It is a relationship certificate based on prima facie evidence that is granted by the authorities based on the Government Order in that regard. In this case, serious disputes have been raised by both sides claiming to be the lineal descendants of the said V.V.Sadayan and Chellammal and the parties are already before the Civil Court in O.S.No.497 of 2026. It is for both parties to let in appropriate evidence and to convince the Civil Court that they are the lineal descendants/legal heirs to claim right over the property in question from the said V.V.Sadayan. Therefore, keeping open the rights of 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026

the parties to agitate the matter before the Civil Court, before which O.S.No.497 of 2026 is pending, the grounds raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner need not be considered and the matter need not be remanded back to the official respondents to reconsider the issue once again. 8. Accordingly, keeping open the liberty of both parties to agitate the issue before the Civil Court, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 20.08.2026 Neutral Citation : no grs To 1. The District Revenue Officer, Chennai District, Singaravelar Maligai, Rajaji Salai, Fourth Floor, 62, Beach Rd, George Town, Chennai – 600 001. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, North Madras, Gandhi Main Road, Puzhal, Chennai – 600 066. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7742 of 2026 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. grs 3. The Tahsildhar, Purasaiwalkam Taluk Office, No.3, Raja Muthiah Rd, Periamet, Chennai – 600 003. W.P.No.7742 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.8351 of 2026 20.08.2026 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis