REVAMMA W.O LATE SIDDAPPA vs TAHASILDAR — 389/2026
Case under Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 Section 10AND 13(3). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 27th June 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KAHS410009172026
Filing Number
389/2026
Filing Date
26-Mar-2026
Registration No
389/2026
Registration Date
26-Mar-2026
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ARASIKERE
Judge
345-Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
Decision Date
27-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Last updated 17-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.REVAMMA W.O LATE SIDDAPPA
Adv. MANJUNATHA B M
-
2.SIDDAMMA D.O LATE NINGAPPA
-
3.SHARADAMMA D.O LATE NINGAPPA
-
4.SHANKARAPPA.D.N S.O LATE NINGAPPA
-
5.SHIVANANJAPPA ALIAS SHIVANNA S.O LATE NINGAPPA
Respondent(s)
-
1.TAHASILDAR
-
2.CONCERNED PERSON IF ANY
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Jun-2026
Orders
Case Summary: 389/2026 The Principal Civil Judge at Arsikere granted the petitioners' petition to register a death that occurred 60+ years ago. The court directed the Tahasildar to register the death of "Siddamma W/o Ganganna" (dated 16.09.1965) and issue a death certificate, finding the petitioners complied with legal guidelines, provided credible evidence through witness testimony and documents (genealogical tree, newspaper publications), and faced no objections from the respondent or public. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jun-2026
Disposed
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
05-Jun-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
26-May-2026
Evidence
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
27-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
26-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 389/2026
Case Summary: 389/2026 The Principal Civil Judge at Arsikere granted the petitioners' petition to register a death that occurred 60+ years ago. The court directed the Tahasildar to register the death of "Siddamma W/o Ganganna" (dated 16.09.1965) and issue a death certificate, finding the petitioners complied with legal guidelines, provided credible evidence through witness testimony and documents (genealogical tree, newspaper publications), and faced no objections from the respondent or public. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts