AMAN ULLAKHAN vs THE THAHASILDHAR — 365/2026

Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(3)(B). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISC.CASES

CNR: KAMS510007482026

Filing Number

275/2026

Filing Date

09-Feb-2026

Registration No

365/2026

Registration Date

11-Feb-2026

Court

PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD

Judge

450-I Addl CIVIL Judge And JMFC Nanjangud

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Last updated 08-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section 13(3)(B)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMAN ULLAKHAN

    Adv. SRI. M. MAHESH

  2. 2.ABDUL MUJEEDKHAN

  3. 3.NASURALLA KHAN

  4. 4.HASINABEGAM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE THAHASILDHAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    OrdersView PDF

    The court allowed the petition filed under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Tahasildar to register the death of Rahamath Khan (died 23.06.1982) in the death register. The court found that the petitioners—his children—had failed to register the death due to ignorance rather than intentional default, and their need for a death certificate to obtain property mutation entries was legitimate and reasonable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    I Addl CIVIL Judge And JMFC Nanjangud

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    For Enquiry

    I Addl CIVIL Judge And JMFC Nanjangud

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 365/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed the petition filed under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Tahasildar to register the death of Rahamath Khan (died 23.06.1982) in the death register. The court found that the petitioners—his children—had failed to register the death due to ignorance rather than intentional default, and their need for a death certificate to obtain property mutation entries was legitimate and reasonable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case