Beer Fathima Beevi v. State of Tamil Nadu

ORDER The impugned order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka. No.A7/1879/2025 dated 13.08.2025, is put under challenge in the present Writ Petition. Further, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the second respondent to declare the settlement document which was registered in Thiruvetriyor Sub Registrar Office in favour of the fifth respondent No.4, via document No.3845/2014 as void.

¶2Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and also perused the materials available on record. Since no adverse order is to be passed as against the fifth respondent, notice to him is dispensed with.

¶3It is the case of the petitioner that she is the mother of the fifth respondent and out of love and affection, she gave a settlement deed vide Doc.No.3845 dated 06.06.2014 in favour of the fifth respondent. However, Page3 of 6 subsequently the fifth respondent failed to take care of the petitioner, which made her to sent a complaint to the respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the settlement deed given by her to the fifth respondent. The second respondent forwarded the complaint to the third respondent to enquire into the matter without cancelling the settlement deed given by the petitioner. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the settlement deed was irrevocable when there is a complaint given to the second respondent, it is the duty cast upon the second respondent to enquire into the matter but he has simply forwarded the same to the third respondent/Commissioner of Police and therefore, he prayed this Court for appropriate orders.

¶5The learned Government Counsel submitted that the second respondent has forwarded the complaint to the third respondent on the ground that the settlement deed is irrevocable and he has no power to cancel the settlement deed and the matter is only with regard to the maintenance amount payable to the petitioner by the fifth respondent, however the same was refused by the petitioner.

¶6Admittedly, the petitioner has given a settlement deed in favour of the fifth respondent in the year 2014 and after lapse of 11 years, since the fifth Page4 of 6 respondent did not care of her, she wanted to cancel the settlement deed under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. However on perusal of the settlement deed, it is seen that it is an irrevocable one and also that the petitioner refused to receive the maintenance amount from the fifth respondent, in this backdrop, the second respondent has forwarded the complaint to the third respondent for appropriate action and therefore, the action of the second respondent cannot be found fault with.

¶7Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the third respondent to enquire into the complaint of the petitioner forwarded to him by the second respondent on 13.08.2025 by summoning the fifth respondent and to conclude the same, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶8With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 11-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order DP Page5 of 6 To

¶1State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The District Collector, Chennai District Collector Office, Beach Road, George Town, Chennai.

¶2State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Revenue Divisional Officer, North Chennai Revenue Division, Puzhal, Chennai-66

¶3State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Commissioner Of Police Central Crime Branch Land And Dispute, Avadi, Chennai.

¶4State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Sub Registrar Thiruvetriyor Sub Registrar Office, Chennai. Page6 of 6

M.DHANDAPANI, J. DP 11-06-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and WMP.No.43464 of 2025 & WMP.No.16128 of 2026 Beer Fathima Beevi W/o. Iqbal, No.138/5, Vanniyar Street, Padi, Chennai-600 050 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The District Collector, Chennai District Collector Office, Beach Road, George Town, Chennai. 2. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Revenue Divisional Officer, North Chennai Revenue Division, Puzhal, Chennai-66 3. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Commissioner Of Police Central Crime Branch Land And Dispute, Avadi, Chennai. 4. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By The Sub Registrar Thiruvetriyor Sub Registrar Office, Chennai. 5. I. Sahul Hamed, S/o. Iqbal, No.4b, 8a West Maada Veethi, Kaladipet, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai-19 ..Respondent(s) Page2 of 6 Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed in Na.Ka. No.A7/1879/2025 dated 13.08.2025 passed by respondent No.2, and quash the same as illegal and subsequently direct the respondent No.2, declare the settlement document which was registered in Thiruvetriyor sub Registrar Office in favour of the respondent No.5, via document No.3845/2014 as void. For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Sivavarthanan, Govt. Counsel for R1 to R4