Heirs not residing in tahsildar’s jurisdiction can’t be ground to deny family tree: Karnataka High Court

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

Justice M.G.S. Kamal passed the order while setting aside the December 27, 2021, decision of sub-division tahsildar, Bengaluru south taluk, of rejecting the application filed by petitioner B.S. Abhinandan Kumar for issuance of the certificate. | Photo Credit: file photo

In a ruling that could benefit hundreds of families struggling to obtain ‘survivor certificates’ across the State, the High Court of Karnataka has held that revenue authorities cannot reject an application for ‘surviving family members certificates’, commonly known as genealogy tree/family tree, merely because some members of the family reside outside the territorial jurisdiction of the tahsildar concerned.

Justice M.G.S. Kamal passed the order while setting aside the December 27, 2021, decision of sub-division tahsildar, Bengaluru south taluk, of rejecting the application filed by petitioner B.S. Abhinandan Kumar for issuance of the certificate. The application was rejected mainly because some of petitioner’s family members were not residing in the tahsildar’s jurisdiction.

The court quashed even the decision of the Assistant Commissioner, who had rejected the petitioner’s appeal, filed under provisions of the Karnataka Sakala Services Act, 2011, against the tahsildar’s decision.

Noticing that procedure for issuance of survivor family members’ certificate is largely driven by government circulars, a recent one issued on July 17, 2026, rather than a dedicated legislative framework, the court said that the only reference in a law for issuing ‘surviving family member certificate’ is available in the list of services of the Revenue Department under the Sakala Act.

However, the court noted that a survivor certificate/genealogy/family tree is generally required after a family member’s death for mutation of legal heirs’ names in revenue records, claiming employment, receiving benefits from authorities, property transactions, partition suits, compensation claims, and various other administrative purposes.

Such certificates are generally issued based on the information provided by the deceased person’s legal heirs after conducting a formal local inquiry, though not mandated in law but referred to in the circulars, through village accountants or revenue inspectors, who are expected to be aware of the details of residents within their area of operation, to verify the information provided by the applicants, the court said.

Pointing out that reasons for the descendants/family members staying at different places could be various, the court said that competent authority cannot reject application merely on the premises that the some family members mentioned in the application are not residing in the jurisdiction of the tahsildar. The court also made it clear that issuance of genealogy/family tree/survivors certificate cannot be equated to issuance of a residential certificate, in which place of residence is important.

“It should be remembered that the genealogy stems from original ancestor and place of his/her permanent abode prior to the demise must be the determining factor....”, the court said, while pointing out that the place where the ancestor permanently resided before death is the relevant factor, not the current residence of the descendants. “If there are no objections or disputes found during the local inspection/enquiry by the revenue authorities, declining to issue such certificates would be arbitrary,” the court observed.

Stating that the issuance of such certificates does not, by itself, confer substantive evidentiary value, the court said that any dispute regarding legal heirship or the status of legal representatives must be adjudicated by a competent civil court subject to laws governing evidences.

In any event, the court made it clear, that the person furnishing the information in the application would be primarily responsible for the consequences arising from it. The court also directed the tahsildar to issue the certificate to the petitioner, who has to furnish details as per the procedure mandated in July 2026 circular.

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.