Nagappa S/o Narasappa Age 37 yrs Occ Coolie R/o Diggaon Village vs The Registrar Birth and Death Tahasil Office Chittapur — 3340/2025
Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13,. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 04th April 2026.
Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES
CNR: KAKB520045262025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3340/2025
Filing Date
03-12-2025
Registration No
3340/2025
Registration Date
03-12-2025
Court
PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHITAPUR
Judge
326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
Decision Date
04th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Nagappa S/o Narasappa Age 37 yrs Occ Coolie R/o Diggaon Village
Adv. B.B.Doddamani
Respondent(s)
The Registrar Birth and Death Tahasil Office Chittapur
Hearing History
Judge: 326-PRL. CIVIL JUDGE JMFC, Chittapur
Disposed
ORDERS
ORDERS
ORDERS
APPEARANCE OF PARTY
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 04-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 07-03-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 20-02-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 29-01-2026 | ORDERS | |
| 10-12-2025 | APPEARANCE OF PARTY |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Civil Judge & JMFC, Chittapur allowed Nagappa's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Registrar to register the death of his brother Dyavappa (dated 10.01.2010) upon payment of requisite penalty. The court found the petitioner's testimony credible, supported by documentary evidence including a non-availability certificate and newspaper publications, and noted that no opposing party contested the claim despite public notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Civil Judge & JMFC, Chittapur allowed Nagappa's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Registrar to register the death of his brother Dyavappa (dated 10.01.2010) upon payment of requisite penalty. The court found the petitioner's testimony credible, supported by documentary evidence including a non-availability certificate and newspaper publications, and noted that no opposing party contested the claim despite public notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts