Rangaiah vs The Tahasildar — 33/2026
Case under Under Section 13 of 3 of Registration of Births and Deaths Act. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 24th April 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KABR610002322026
Filing Number
33/2026
Filing Date
19-Jan-2026
Registration No
33/2026
Registration Date
19-Jan-2026
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NELAMANGALA
Judge
104-Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
24-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Last updated 18-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rangaiah
Adv. Kanakaraju G.N
-
2.B. Bettaiah
-
3.Rangaswamy D
Respondent(s)
-
1.The Tahasildar
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
24-Apr-2026
OrdersView PDF
Case 33/2026 Summary The court allowed the petitioners' petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, directing the Tahasildar to register the death of Venkatamma (deceased on 06.02.1969) and issue a death certificate. The court found sufficient evidence through witness testimony, genealogical records, property documentation, and newspaper notices establishing the death, while the respondent remained absent. The court reasoned that under Section 13(3), the fact of death is the primary concern rather than precise dates, and absent justifiable grounds for rejection, the registration directive should be issued. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Apr-2026
Disposed
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
23-Mar-2026
Arguments
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
17-Mar-2026
First Hearing
Prl. CIVIL Judge And JMFC
-
19-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 33/2026
Case 33/2026 Summary The court allowed the petitioners' petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, directing the Tahasildar to register the death of Venkatamma (deceased on 06.02.1969) and issue a death certificate. The court found sufficient evidence through witness testimony, genealogical records, property documentation, and newspaper notices establishing the death, while the respondent remained absent. The court reasoned that under Section 13(3), the fact of death is the primary concern rather than precise dates, and absent justifiable grounds for rejection, the registration directive should be issued. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts