# Karnataka high court: Heirs’ different residences no bar to family tree certificate 2026-10-06T02:27:45+00:00 | Governance | Indian Opinion Desk Corroboration: 2 independent outlets The Karnataka high court has ruled that revenue authorities cannot reject applications for genealogy, family tree or survivor certificates solely because some family members live outside their territorial jurisdiction. Justice MGS Kamal said the determining factor should be the place where the original ancestor had his permanent abode before death. If at least the claimants reside within the officer's jurisdiction and a local enquiry reveals no objection, refusal would be arbitrary, the court held. The order came on a petition by BS Abhinandan Kumar, whose application for a genealogy certificate covering 11 family members was rejected by the sub-divisional tahsildar, Tavarakere, and the assistant commissioner, Bengaluru South. The tahsildar had cited failure to furnish address proof of family members and death certificates of deceased relatives. Justice Kamal set aside the December 27, 2021 decision, noting that such certificates are issued based on information from surviving heirs and verified through local enquiry by revenue officials. The court directed the tahsildar to issue the certificate subject to Kumar furnishing details as per a government circular of 17 July 2026, within the timeframe under the Sakala scheme. ## Indian Opinion Analysis Both Times of India and The Hindu present a straight, neutral report of the Karnataka high court ruling, with no discernible slant. Times of India foregrounds the legal reasoning and the government advocate's defence, while The Hindu emphasises the practical impact on hundreds of families and the reliance on circulars rather than a dedicated law. Neither outlet omits key facts or adopts a pro-government or critical frame. The consistent coverage underscores the court's clarity: the place of the ancestor's permanent abode, not current residences, determines jurisdiction. The next step is the tahsildar issuing the certificate to petitioner Kumar under the July 17 circular within the Sakala timeline. ## Coverage Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral - timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report) Straight report of court ruling, quotes both sides - thehindu.com (neutral report) Straight report of court ruling, adds practical context This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Tags: Bengaluru, BS Abhinandan Kumar, Justice MGS Kamal, Karnataka High Court Canonical: https://indianopinion.org/karnataka-high-court-heirs-different-residences-no-bar-to-family-tree-certificate/ License: Summary and commentary (c) Indian Opinion, reusable with attribution. Facts belong to the linked sources. Cite: https://indianopinion.org/karnataka-high-court-heirs-different-residences-no-bar-to-family-tree-certificate/#story-in-brief How this brief was made: an AI model read the reports linked above and wrote this summary and analysis, which were published automatically. Published briefs are sampled every hour by an automated quality check; the editor verifies its findings and approves corrections, and corrected briefs carry a dated correction line. Stance labels are editorial classifications of how each outlet framed this story, assigned by the same model, not ratings of the outlets. We do no original reporting. Methodology: https://indianopinion.org/ai-use-policy/