Disposed¶41

Smt Mahadevamma v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Apr 2026WP/10754/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, WP No. 10754 of 2026 (LB-RES), decided 28.04.2026 by M.I. Arun, J. Correction/change of father-in-law's name in death certificate; Section 15, Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 enquiry; endorsement dated 06.01.2026 set aside; Tahsildar directed to hold enquiry and decide within three months; reliance on W.P.No.6370/2024; writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned endorsement dated 06.01.2026 (Annexure-'E') set aside; Respondent No.3 directed to hold an enquiry under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, considering the ratio in W.P.No.6370/2024, and take an appropriate decision within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order. ¶41

Smt Mahadevamma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned endorsement rejecting the petitioner's request for change of her father-in-law's name in the death certificate of her husband is liable to be set aside and an enquiry under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 conducted.

¶32

Court's answer

The impugned endorsement dated 06.01.2026 issued by the third respondent (Annexure-'E') is set aside.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

Respondent No.3 is directed to hold an enquiry as contemplated under Section 15 of the Act, taking into consideration the ratio laid down in W.P.No.6370/2024, and thereafter take a decision whether to change the name of the petitioner's father-in-law in the death certificate of her husband.

¶39

Key takeaways

The enquiry shall be conducted in accordance with law and an appropriate decision taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (LB-RES) under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India - Petitioner sought change of her father-in-law's name from 'Thimma Krishna Gouda' to 'Krishnegowda' in the death certificate of her husband Venkatesh; request rejected by endorsement dated 06.01.2026 (Annexure-'E') of the Tahsildar, Anekal Taluk (Respondent No.3). Held: endorsement set aside; Respondent No.3 directed to hold an enquiry under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, taking into consideration the ratio laid down in W.P.No.6370/2024, and take an appropriate decision within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of (M.I. Arun, J., High Court of Karnataka, 28.04.2026).

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:23661 WP No. 10754 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.10754 OF 2026 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. MAHADEVAMMA W/O. VANKATESHA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, CHIKKAHOSAHALLI, KASABAHOBALI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 106.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

(BY SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI INDIMATH, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION M.S. BULDING, BANGALORE

¶14

REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY-560 001.

¶15

CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGAR PALIKE DIRECTORATE OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, 7TH FLOOR, VISHVESHWARAYA MAIN TOWER, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2026:KHC:23661 WP No. 10754 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶20

TAHSILDAR ANEKALTALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 106.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA, AGA)

¶23

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.12.2025 AT ANNEXURE-F AND ISSUE THE RECTIFIED DEATH CERTIFICATE, ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶26

¶27

NC: 2026:KHC:23661 WP No. 10754 of 2026

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

The petitioner has requested change of her

¶31

father-in-law's name from 'Thimma Krishna Gouda' to 'Krishnegowda', in the death certificate of her husband Venkatesh. However, the same has been rejected. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

¶32

The case of the petitioner is that Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 (for short 'the Act') permits an enquiry to be conducted by the authorities concerned and thereafter, a decision is to be taken as to whether the requested name change is required to be corrected or not. The petitioner also places reliance upon the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.6370/2024 and prays that the impugned endorsement be set aside, that an enquiry be conducted under Section 15 of the Act and thereafter, an order be passed whether to correct the name of the petitioner's father-in-law in the death certificate of her husband.

¶33

Learned AGA has no objection for the same. Hence, the following:-

¶34

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:23661 WP No. 10754 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORDER

¶38

i. The impugned endorsement dated 06.01.2026 issued by the third respondent vide Annexure-'E' to the writ petition is set aside.

¶39

ii. Respondent No.3 is directed to hold an enquiry as contemplated under Section 15 of the Act, by also taking into consideration the ratio laid down by this Court in W.P.No.6370/2024 and thereafter, to take a decision whether to change the name of the petitioner's father-in-law in the death certificate of her husband or not.

¶40

iii. The enquiry shall be conducted in accordance with law, and an appropriate decision shall be taken within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶41

iv. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed

¶42

of .

¶43

Sd/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶44

VMB

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Smt Mahadevamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Mahadevamma v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R Sandeep Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

M/S Unique Services Minmetals Private Limited Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Kavya N K (Mouna N K) Vs the Assistant Director

P Narasimharaju Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Vishalakshi. v Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Sri Vikram Kumar Solanki Vs Greater Bengaluru Authority