Bangalore District Court
Sri Alankar Hamsalekha vs The Union Of India on 4 December, 2015
(C.R.P. 67) Govt. Of Karnataka
Form No.9
(Civil)
Title sheet for
Judgment in Suits
(R.P.91)
TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGEMENTS IN SUITS
IN THE COURT OF THE XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY.
(CCH.NO.12)
PRESENT : SRI MANJUNATH NAYAK,
B.A.L.,LL.B.,
XVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CITY.
DATED: 4th DECEMBER 2015
ORIGINAL SUIT NO.949/2014
********
PLAINTIFFS: Sri Alankar Hamsalekha,
S/o. Sri Gangaraju @ Hamsalekha,
Aged 44 years, R/at 1092,
10th 'C' cross, West of Chord Road,
Mahalakshmipuram,
Bangalore 560 086.
(By Sri C. Prakash, Advocate)
Vs -
DEFENDANTS: 1. The Union of India,
By its Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs,
New Delhi.
2. The State of Karnataka,
By its Chief Secretary,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore 560 001.
2 O.S.No. 949/2014
3. The Regional Passport Officer,
Lalbagh Road, Bangalore.
4. The Commissioner,
Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike,
Bangalore.
(Rep by Sri Prakash Rao.K., AGP, for
Deft No.2, Sri K.M. Janardhan Reddy,
Advocate, For Deft No.3, Sri D.Nagaraja,
Advocate for Deft No.4 and Deft No.1
Placed exparte)
******
Date of institution of the suit : 01-02-2014
Nature of the suit Declaration & Injunction
Date of the commencement of 23-09-2015
recording of the evidence:
Date on which the Judgment 04-12-2015
was pronounced
Total duration Year Month Days
01 10 03
******
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff filed this suit claiming the decree to declare his name as 'Suryaprakash' and directing defendants to enter his name as 'Suryaprakash' in all his official records.
2. The case of the plaintiff, as made out in the plaint, is as follows:
The plaintiff is the son of one Gangaraju alias Hamsalekha and Smt. Latha Hamsalekha. The plaintiff was born on 30-07- 1970 and he was named as Suryaprakash and subsequently, his name was changed as Alankar Hamsalekha. The plaintiff now 3 O.S.No. 949/2014 wants to change his name as Suryaprakash and enter the same in all his official records. The plaintiff issued legal notice dated:
11-09-2013 calling upon defendants to enter his name as 'Suryaprakash' instead of Alankar Hamsalekha. But, defendants failed to comply the legal notice, which made the plaintiff to file the present suit. On all these grounds, plaintiff claimed decree for declaration and mandatory injunction in the above terms.
3. In response to the summons issued by this Court, defendant No.1 to 4 appeared before this court through their counsel and defendant No.3 filed written statement and contended that the suit is not maintainable in law or on facts. The plaintiff is guilty of suppressing the material facts. The plaintiff obtained a passport by showing his name as Alankar Hamsalekha. If the plaintiff wishes to change his name again, he has to give paper publication. The plaintiff has to furnish the additional documents like ration card, election identity card, income tax returns, Pan Card, Bank account extract. The defendant No.3 has no objections for change of name of the plaintiff. On these grounds, defendant No.3 prayed for dismissal of the suit with costs.
4 O.S.No. 949/2014
4. On the basis of the above pleadings of both the parties, following issues were framed:
1. Whether the Plaintiff proves that his name is to be changed as Suryaprakash?
2. Whether the Plaintiff proves that his name in his all official records are to be changed as Suryaprakash instead of Alankar Hamsalekha?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the decree claimed in the suit?
4. What Order or Decree?
5. To prove the above issues and to substantiate their contentions, plaintiff examined before this Court as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to 10 documents. The defendants did not adduce any oral and documentary evidence on their behalf.
6. I have heard the arguments.
7. By considering the pleadings, oral and documentary evidence of both the parties and also the arguments canvassed by them, I answer the above issues in the following, because of my below-discussed reasons:
ISSUE NO.1 : IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
ISSUE NO.2 : IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
ISSUE NO.3 : IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
ISSUE NO.4 : AS PER FINAL ORDER.
5 O.S.No. 949/2014
REASONS
ISSUE No.1 AND 2:-
8. To avoid repetition of my discussion on facts, I have taken these issues together for determination. The plaintiff, who was examined before this court as PW-1, has reiterated plaint averments in his examination in chief affidavit and deposed that he was born on 30-07-1970 and he was originally named as G. Surya Prakash. PW-1 further deposed that subsequently his name was changed as Alankar Hamsalekha. PW-1 further deposed that now he wants to change his name as Suryaprakash. PW-1 further deposed about he requesting defendants to change his name in his official records and defendants refusing to change his name in his official records without the decree from the Civil Court, which made him to file present suit.
9. The plaintiff has produced his passport as per Ex.P-1.
The driving Licence of the plaintiff is marked as per Ex.P-2. The PAN card of the plaintiff is marked as per Ex.P-3. The election identity card of the plaintiff is marked as per Ex.P-4. The legal notice issued to defendants is marked as per Ex.P-5. The postal receipts were marked as Ex.P-6. The postal acknowledgements 6 O.S.No. 949/2014 were marked as per Ex.P-7 to 9. The letter issued by the defendant No.4 is marked as per Ex.P-10.
10. The defendants have not let in any oral and documentary evidence on their behalf.
11. It is the case of the plaintiff that he was named as 'Suryaprakash.G.' and subsequently, his name was changed as Alankar Hamsalekha and now he wants to again change his name as Suryaprakash. To show that his name was entered as Alankar Hamsalekha in his official records, plaintiff produced his passport as per Ex.P-1, Driving Licence as per Ex.P-2 and election identity card as per Ex.P-4 and PAN Card as per Ex.P-3. In all these records, name of the plaintiff is entered as Alankar Hamsalekha. Now the plaintiff claims that he wants to call him as 'Suryaprakash'. During the course of his evidence, the plaintiff has deposed that he has already filed affidavit regarding change of his name.
12. As per the unreported decisions of our High Court in RFA No.947/2013 dated 10-12-2013 (Srinidhi vs. Government of Karnataka and others), RFA No.1044/2009 dated 02-01-2013 (Hucheshwara S. Mali vs. Head Master and others) and RFA No.1994/2013 dated 25-02-2014 7 O.S.No. 949/2014 (Ms. Shruthi Yellamma vs. Regional Passport Officer), the suit for change of name is maintainable before the Civil Court, as there is no other provisions or procedures provided for change of names in the school records. The plaintiff is not intended to make any unlawful gain or there is no such malafide intention on the part of the plaintiff in filing the present suit seeking change of her name.
13. Now as per the Government Circular, any entry of official records like change of name, parents name, date of birth and caste is to be made only by obtaining decree from the court. Therefore, the plaintiff constrained to file this suit. Considering all these aspects I have to accept the plaintiff's version for change of his name as Suryaprakash and accordingly change his name as Suryaprakash instead of Alankar Hamsalekha in all his official records. Accordingly, I answer issue No.1 and 2 in the affirmative.
ISSUE No.3:-
14. In view of my finding on the above issues the plaintiff is entitled for the decree for declaration of his name and also change of name in his official records. Accordingly I answer issue No.3 in the affirmative.
8 O.S.No. 949/2014
ISSUE NO. 4:-
15. In view of my findings on the above issues, the suit filed by the plaintiff deserves to be decreed. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I feel it is just and proper to direct both the parties to bear their respective costs. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:-
ORDER The suit filed by the plaintiff is decreed in the following terms.
It is declared that the plaintiff be called and referred as 'Suryaprakash'.
Consequently defendants are hereby directed to enter the plaintiff's name as Suryaprakash instead of Alankar Hamsalekha in all his official records.
I direct both the parties to bear their respective costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
******* (Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by him, the transcript corrected by me, signed and then pronounced by me in open Court on this the 4th day of December, 2015).
(MANJUNATH NAYAK) XVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
()()()()()()() 9 O.S.No. 949/2014 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR PLAINTIFF:-
PW.1 Alankar Hamsalekha LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR PLAINTIFF:-
Ex.P-1 Passport Ex.P-2 Driving Licence Ex.P-3 Pan Card Ex.P-4 Voters ID Ex.P-5 Legal notice Ex.P-6 Postal receipts Ex.P-7 to 9 Postal endorsements Ex.P10 Letter from BBMP
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR DEFENDANTS:-
- NIL -
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR DEFENDANTS:-
- NIL -
(MANJUNATH NAYAK) XVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.10 O.S.No. 949/2014
(Judgment pronounced in open Court vide separate judgment) ORDER The suit filed by the plaintiff is decreed in the following terms.
It is declared that the plaintiff be called and referred as 'Suryaprakash'.
Consequently defendants are hereby directed to enter the plaintiff's name as Suryaprakash instead of Alankar Hamsalekha in all his official records.
I direct both the parties to bear their respective costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
(MANJUNATH NAYAK) XVI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU 11 O.S.No. 949/2014 12 O.S.No. 949/2014