Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: ~1~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
Filed on : 25/04/2018.
Registered on : 25/04/2018.
Decided on : 04/12/2018.
Duration : 0 Y., 07 M., 09 D.
Exh. :
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
66TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(Presided by R. M. Nerlikar)
Shahbuddin Hamidullah Chowdhary.
Age : Adault. Occ. : Nil.
R/o. : Sai Mohd. Chawl Jari Mari,
Kurla Anderhi Road, Sagar Hotel,
Kurla (W), Mumbai72.
.. Applicant.
V/s.
The SubRegistrar,
B.M.C., LWard, Mumbai.
.. Respondent.
Application for registration of birth
Ld. Advocate for applicant. : Sarika V. Prabhale.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 04/12/2018)
The applicant has made this application for
registration of birth date of his daughter viz. Jainab
Shahbuddin Chowdhary.
-- 1 of 6 --
~2~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
2. In short it is the case of the applicant, a female
child viz. Jainab Shahbuddin Chowdhary was born, on
19/08/2012, at home, i.e. Sai Mohd. Chawl Jari Mari, Kurla
Anderhi Road, Sagar Hotel, Kurla (W), Mumbai72 to his wife
viz. Sahanaz Shahbuddin Chowdhary. Due to inadvertence,
he could not register her date of birth within 30 days, as
contemplated U/Sec. 8 and Rule5 of the M.R.B.D. Rules 1969
and 1976. As per provision of section 13 (2) of the R.B.D. Act
an order of the Magistrate is required to register the date of
birth. Therefore, he prayed to direct respondent to register the
date of birth of his daughter in it's record.
3. Notice to the respondent wsa issued, it was served
upon it. Respondent filed his say, at (Exh.6), which disclosed
applicant has produced satisfactory documentary evidence
regarding birth of his daughter, prayed for appropriate order.
4. Heard Ld. Counsel Sarika V. Prabhale, for the
applicant.
5. The points for determination along with my
findings thereon are, as under...
-- 2 of 6 --
~3~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
SR. NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Whether applicant proves, his
daughter viz. Jainab born, on
19/08/2012, at his home ?
No.
2 Whether applicant proves, her date of
birth was not recorded with B.M.C.
record?
No.
3 What order ? As per final
order.
R E A S O N S
AS TO POINT NOS.1 AND 2 :
6. These points are interlinks with each other,
therefore, I am discussing the same together.
7. In order to prove the case, applicant has not
examined any witness. The applicant has produced
documentary evidence in support of his claim, those are xerox
copy of his Ration Card, xerox copy of his Aadhar Card, xerox
copy of his PAN Card, xerox copy of his wife's Aadhar Card,
xerox copy of immunization card of his daughter issued by
-- 3 of 6 --
~4~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
BMC, xerox copy of medical certificate dtd.02/04/2018,
issued by Dr. Zaki Anwar Ansari in respect of home delivery of
Mrs. Sahanaz Shahbuddin Chowdhary.
8. If read section 13 (3) of M. R. B. D. Act of 1969, it
cast responsibility upon the Magistrate to verify the claim of
the applicant. Apart affidavit of applicant and xerox copies of
his Ration Card, his Aadhar Card, his PAN Card, his wife's
Aadhar Card, immunization card of his daughter issued by
BMC, medical certificate dtd.02/04/2018, issued by Dr. Zaki
Anwar Ansari in respect of home delivery of Mrs. Sahanaz
Shahbuddin Chowdhary, there is no documentary evidence on
record to show that, the daughter of applicant born on
19/08/2012. In the absence of it, xerox copies submitted by
applicant is of no use.
9. The Ld. counsel for applicant submitted that, he
has placed on record the documents those are xerox copy of
his Ration Card, xerox copy of his Aadhar Card, xerox copy of
his PAN Card, xerox copy of his wife's Aadhar Card, xerox
copy of immunization card of his daughter issued by BMC,
xerox copy of medical certificate dtd.02/04/2018, issued by
Dr. Zaki Anwar Ansari in respect of home delivery of Mrs.
Sahanaz Shahbuddin Chowdhary. As above said documents
are xerox copies, same cannot be read in the evidence.
-- 4 of 6 --
~5~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
Further, they are not proved in accordance with law, as no
efforts were made on behalf of the applicant to prove those
documents.
10. If considered these aspects, it is difficult to hold the
daughter of applicant, born on 19/08/2012. Therefore, same
cannot be considered. Considering all these aspects, I answer
point No. 1 and 2 in negative.
AS TO POINT NO.3 :
11. In view of above discussion the applicant has failed
to proved his case. Therefore, he is not entitled for the relief,
as prayed for. The application is required to be rejected.
Accordingly, answer point No. 3 and I pass the following
order.
ORDER
1] The application is hereby rejected.
2] No order as to cost.
Date 04/12/2018.
SRD.
Sd/
(R. M. Nerlikar)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
66th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 6 --
~6~ Judgment C. C. No. : 583/N/2018
Dictated on : 04/12/2018.
Transcribed on : 04/12/2018.
Signed on : 06/12/2018.
SRD.
-- 6 of 6 --