SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18510

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
LINTA MATHAI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 19160 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN, SMT.INDU SUSAN JACOB, SHRI.TAJ K. TOM, SHRI.ABHIJITH U.
For the Respondents: SHRI.SUBASH CHAND, SC, SHRI.M.V.S.NAMPOOTHIRY

The Registration of Births and Deaths Act allows for correction of records based on public documents, without prohibiting necessary amendments.

Headnote:This case relates to a challenge against an order rejecting a request for correction of the date of birth in a birth certificate as per the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, which regulates the registration process but does not prohibit necessary corrections. The Court emphasized the need to consider public records in reassessing the correction request. The impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to revisit the application based on relevant documents within six weeks.

Table of Content
1. legal framing regarding correction of birth records. (Para 1 , 2)
2. quashing of the incorrect order and allowing the petition. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

Petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order passed by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, Thiruvalla Municipality, dated 28.05.2025, rejecting an application preferred for correction of the date of birth in Ext.P4 birth certificate as 19.05.1981 instead of 19.12.1980. Petitioner submits that all the other records, including the Passport, Aadhar Card, and School Certificate, show the entry as 19.05.1981. The reasoning in Ext.P7 is that since the hospital record shows the date as 19.12.1980, a correction is not possible, cannot be sustained.

2. As held by this Court on several occasions, including in the judgment of this Court in Secretary, Registrar of Births and Deaths v. Thomas Jacob and others [2011 (3) KHC 389] that the Registration of Births and Deaths Act or Rules does not create or extinguish any right and that the Act is intended only to regulate the process and procedure of registration of births and deaths and the correction of any such entry if required and that the Act or Rules cannot be understood to prohibit such correction.

3. Given the above, Ext.P7 order cannot be sustained and is accordingly quashed. There will be a direction to respondents 2 and 4 to reconsider the application preferred by the petitioner in light of the observations made above, and also taking into account other public records, including the School Certificate, Aadhar Card, and the Passport. Fresh orders as directed above shall be passed within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The impugned order is quashed, and the writ petition is allowed as above.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top