MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Nativity Cannot Be Determined Solely by Birthplace: Madras High Court Quashed Tahsildar's Order, Directs Issuance of Nativity Certificate to Minor Born Outside Tamil Nadu

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court has directed the issuance of a Nativity Certificate to Minor Gaurav Murali, whose application had been previously rejected by the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Musiri Taluk. The judgment, pronounced by Justice G.R. Swaminathan on May 13, 2024, underscores the importance of parental roots and domicile in determining nativity, setting aside the respondent's reliance on the applicant's birthplace and current residence outside Tamil Nadu.

Domicile and Nativity Determination: The court emphasized that the determination of nativity cannot be solely based on the applicant's birthplace or current residence. Justice Swaminathan observed, "The expression 'nativity' denotes the roots on which a person is anchored. It is incorrect to deny a Nativity Certificate merely because the petitioner was born in Mumbai."

The judgment referenced multiple precedents, highlighting that the concept of nativity includes the applicant's familial and ancestral connections to Tamil Nadu. The petitioner's father, Murali Chelliah, born in Musiri Taluk and educated in Tamil Nadu, along with his mother from Pollachi, Coimbatore District, established a strong case for the petitioner's nativity.

Witness Testimonies: Addressing the issue of the petitioner's family residence, the court noted that Murali Chelliah and his wife moved to Mumbai for employment with the Shipping Corporation of India Limited, but maintained their roots in Tamil Nadu. "Merely because a person has been absent from the State on account of employment, he or she will not lose his or her permanent residence in the State," Justice Swaminathan stated, quoting from a similar case.

The judgment extensively discussed the principles of evaluating nativity for certificate issuance. The court held that the authorities' rejection based on the petitioner’s birthplace and current residence contradicted established legal principles. The ruling emphasized, "The petitioner's roots are traceable to Tamil Nadu, and he should be considered a native of the State despite his birth in Mumbai."

Justice Swaminathan remarked, "It is obvious that the expression 'nativity' denotes the roots on which a person is anchored. In these circumstances, rejection of the petitioner's application is incorrect and runs counter to the aforesaid rulings."

The Madras High Court's directive to issue the Nativity Certificate within seven days from the date of the order sends a clear message about the broader criteria for determining nativity. This landmark decision reaffirms the importance of considering familial and ancestral connections over mere birthplace or residence, potentially impacting similar cases in the future and reinforcing the legal framework for nativity determination in Tamil Nadu.

Date of Decision: May 13, 2024

Minor Gaurav Murali, Rep. by his Natural Guardian Father Mr. Murali Chelliah v. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Musiri Taluk, Trichy District

 

Latest Legal News