Mujubur Rahaman S/o. Mohammad Haneefsab vs The Tahasildara, Harapanahalli — 1015/2025

Case under Registration of Births and Deaths Act Section U/s.13(3). Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE on 18th March 2026.

Crl.Misc. - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS

CNR: KAVN510038762025

Case disposedSub Stage

e-Filing Number

29-11-2025

Filing Number

1016/2025

Filing Date

01-12-2025

Registration No

1015/2025

Registration Date

01-12-2025

Court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARAPANAHALLI

Judge

254-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARAPANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT

Decision Date

18th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED OTHERWISE

Acts & Sections

REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS ACT Section U/s.13(3)

Petitioner(s)

Mujubur Rahaman S/o. Mohammad Haneefsab

Adv. BHP

Respondent(s)

The Tahasildara, Harapanahalli

Hearing History

Judge: 254-CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HARAPANAHALLI VIJAYANAGARA DISTRICT

18-03-2026

Disposed

07-03-2026

ORDERS

07-02-2026

APPEARANCE OF PARTIES/ADVOCATES-C

03-01-2026

APPEARANCE OF PARTIES/ADVOCATES-C

01-12-2025

APPEARANCE OF PARTIES/ADVOCATES-C

Final Orders / Judgements

18-03-2026
Orders

Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge of Harapanahalli allowed Mujubur Rahaman's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Tahasildar to register his birth (10.06.1978, Uchangidurga village) and issue a birth certificate. The court found the petitioner's unchallenged evidence (Aadhar card, age certificate) sufficient and the respondent's absence as default, relying on Karnataka High Court precedent that the factum of birth—not the exact date—is the material consideration in such proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

07-03-2026
Deposition
casestatus.in Summary

Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge of Harapanahalli allowed Mujubur Rahaman's petition under Section 13(3) of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, directing the Tahasildar to register his birth (10.06.1978, Uchangidurga village) and issue a birth certificate. The court found the petitioner's unchallenged evidence (Aadhar card, age certificate) sufficient and the respondent's absence as default, relying on Karnataka High Court precedent that the factum of birth—not the exact date—is the material consideration in such proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HARAPANAHALLI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case