Abdul S/o Akbarsab Age 16 Yrs U/g of Father. R/o Mataki vs The Registrar Of Birth And Death, through Tahasildar Aland — 4023/2025

Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(iii). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 06th March 2026.

Case disposed

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES

CNR: KAKB220123662025

Filing Number

4023/2025

Filing Date

11-Dec-2025

Registration No

4023/2025

Registration Date

11-Dec-2025

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ALAND

Judge

324-Prl. CIVIL Judge JMFC,Aland

Decision Date

06-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Last updated 13-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(iii)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Abdul S/o Akbarsab Age 16 Yrs U/g of Father. R/o Mataki

    Adv. L S Pujari Advocate

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Registrar Of Birth And Death, through Tahasildar Aland

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    OrdersView PDF

    The court allowed a petition by 16-year-old Abdul under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Registrar to register his birth date as 07-01-2009 and issue a birth certificate. The court found that the petitioner had provided sufficient evidence through his father's testimony and documentary proof (school certificate and non-availability certificate) to establish that his birth was not registered due to oversight, and that the respondent's failure to contest the claim left it unchallenged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Prl. CIVIL Judge JMFC,Aland

  4. 10-Feb-2026

    Orders..

    Prl. CIVIL Judge JMFC,Aland

  5. 30-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 11-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4023/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed a petition by 16-year-old Abdul under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Registrar to register his birth date as 07-01-2009 and issue a birth certificate. The court found that the petitioner had provided sufficient evidence through his father's testimony and documentary proof (school certificate and non-availability certificate) to establish that his birth was not registered due to oversight, and that the respondent's failure to contest the claim left it unchallenged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case