Aejaz Ahmed S/o Mohammad Ismail Narayanpet Age 55 Yrs Occ Cook. vs The Registrar Of Birth And Death, through Cheif Officer TMC, Aland — 631/2026

Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(iii). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 18th May 2026.

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES

CNR: KAKB220007582026

Case disposed

Filing Number

631/2026

Filing Date

05-02-2026

Registration No

631/2026

Registration Date

05-02-2026

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND

Judge

324-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Aland

Decision Date

18th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Acts & Sections

Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(iii)

Petitioner(s)

Aejaz Ahmed S/o Mohammad Ismail Narayanpet Age 55 Yrs Occ Cook.

Adv. Devanand Hodloorkar

Respondent(s)

The Registrar Of Birth And Death, through Cheif Officer TMC, Aland

Hearing History

Judge: 324-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC,Aland

18-05-2026

Disposed

15-04-2026

ORDERS..

14-03-2026

NOTICE

13-03-2026

NOTICE

Final Orders / Judgements

18-05-2026
Orders

The court allowed petitioner Aejaz Ahmed's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969, directing the Registrar to register his birth date (01-01-1970) and issue a birth certificate. The petitioner's testimony and documentary evidence (non-availability certificate and PAN card) established his birth was never registered despite occurring at his residential address, and the respondent's non-appearance left his claim unchallenged. The court clarified this order is not conclusive proof if disputed in future civil or criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed petitioner Aejaz Ahmed's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act 1969, directing the Registrar to register his birth date (01-01-1970) and issue a birth certificate. The petitioner's testimony and documentary evidence (non-availability certificate and PAN card) established his birth was never registered despite occurring at his residential address, and the respondent's non-appearance left his claim unchallenged. The court clarified this order is not conclusive proof if disputed in future civil or criminal proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case