Karnataka HC Gives Registrar 4 Weeks To Decide Wife’s Request To Correct Her Name On Husband’s Death Certificate

The petitioner sought correction of her name in her husband’s death certificate, which recorded her as “Nayana Urf Shobha Byadagi” rather than “Shobha Byadagi.”

She applied under Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, enclosing identity documents and declarations, but the respondent issued an endorsement dated 7 May 2025 stating that a court decree was necessary.

The petitioner challenged that endorsement and sought correction of the certificate.

The High Court considered the matter in light of a Coordinate Bench decision holding that correction of birth and death register entries falls within the statutory remedy under Section 15.

Section 15 of the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, read with the Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths Rules, 1999, provides a statutory mechanism for correction of entries in birth and death records.

Relying on RFA No. 2454/2024 and the decisions discussed therein, including Prakash V. v. The Registrar of Births and Deaths, W.P. No. 18803/2024, the Court noted that the Registrar’s powers may extend beyond clerical errors to substantive corrections where supported by adequate evidence; the Registrar must consider the application and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

The respondent had rejected the request on the ground that a court decree was indispensable.

The Coordinate Bench’s decision, however, recognised Section 15 as the statutory route for seeking correction and explained that the Registrar is empowered to assess supporting evidence and determine the application.

Applying that principle, the Court held that the endorsement could not stand, while leaving the merits of the requested name correction to the respondent’s consideration.

It issued a mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner’s Section 15 application and pass an appropriate order as expeditiously as possible, and no later than four weeks from the date of the order.

The Court did not itself direct that the name be corrected.