LAKKAMMA vs TAHASILDAR,BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRAR — 1399/2025
Case under Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999 Section 13(3). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 27th June 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KAHS410038302025
Filing Number
1399/2025
Filing Date
24-Nov-2025
Registration No
1399/2025
Registration Date
24-Nov-2025
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.LAKKAMMA
Adv. P.NATARAJ
Respondent(s)
-
1.TAHASILDAR,BIRTH AND DEATH REGISTRAR
-
2.IF ANY BODU CONCERNED
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
27-Jun-2026
Orders
Case Summary: Crl.Mis.No.1399/2025 Court Decision: The court allowed Lakkamma's petition and directed the Tahasildar/Birth & Death Registrar to register the death of "Chikkalakkamma W/o Late Siddarangashetty" dated 20.04.1950 and issue a death certificate. The petitioner's testimony, genealogical tree evidence, and compliance with High Court guidelines were found credible, and no objections were raised despite newspaper publication notices. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jun-2026
Disposed
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
03-Jun-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
26-May-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
30-Apr-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
04-Apr-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
10-Feb-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
23-Jan-2026
Orders
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
19-Jan-2026
Notice
Prl.civil Judge And JMFC
-
27-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
24-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 1399/2025
Case Summary: Crl.Mis.No.1399/2025 Court Decision: The court allowed Lakkamma's petition and directed the Tahasildar/Birth & Death Registrar to register the death of "Chikkalakkamma W/o Late Siddarangashetty" dated 20.04.1950 and issue a death certificate. The petitioner's testimony, genealogical tree evidence, and compliance with High Court guidelines were found credible, and no objections were raised despite newspaper publication notices. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts