Karnataka High Court
Huccheshwara S Mali vs The Head Master on 2 January, 2013
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL
R.S.A.NO.1044/2009
BETWEEN:
HUCCHESHWARA S. MALI
S/O.SANGAPPA MALI
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY
NEXT FRIEND, GUARDIAN AND
NATURAL FATHER, SRI SANGAPPA MALI
S/O.VEERAPPA MALI
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/O.KALAMATT ROAD
GANGAVATHI TOWN
KOPPAL DISTRICT, PIN: 583 227.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI IQBAL PATEL, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE HEAD MASTER
GOOD SHEPHERD HIGHER
PRIMARY SCHOOL
GANGAVATHI
KOPPAL DISTRICT
PIN CODE - 583 227.
2. B.E.O, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
GANGAVATHI TOWN
KOPPAL DISTRICT
PIN CODE - 583 227.
3. D.D.P.I
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
KOPPAL PIN CODE - 583 227.
4. PRINCIPAL
MANDARA RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL
-2-
HIGH SCHOOL NEELANAHALLI
DODDABATHY VILLAGE
DAVANGERE DISTRICT
PIN CODE - 577 502.
5. B.E.O (NORTH)
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
K.R.MARKET, DAVANGERE
PIN CODE - 577 502.
6. D.D.P.I
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
I MAIN, P.J.EXTENSION
DAVANGERE
PIN CODE - 577 502.
7. THE SECRETARY
SECONDARY SCHOOL EDUCATION BOARD
MALLESHWARAM
BANGALORE - 560 003.
8. CHIEF SECRETARY
STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560 001.
9. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DAVANGERE DISTRICT
DAVANGERE - 577 502.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI GOPAL BILAL MANE, HCGP FOR R-2, 3 & 6-9
R-1, 4 & 5 SERVED)
THIS RSA FILED U/S 100 OF CPC AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.4.2009 PASSED IN
R.A.NO.55/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN.), DAVANGERE, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND
CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
9.6.2008 PASSED IN O.S.NO.265/2007 ON THE FILE OF
THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.), DAVANAGERE.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
-3-
JUDGMENT
Though this matter is listed for admission, having regard to the nature of the dispute raised in the suit and with the consent of learned Counsel for both parties, the main matter is taken up for hearing at the stage of admission.
2. After hearing both the learned Counsel, the substantial questions that fall for consideration are:
1) Whether the Courts below failed to consider the pleadings and the evidence adduced in their proper perspective, while dismissing the suit filed seeking a direction for change of his name from Huccheshwara to Shashank?
2) Whether the plaintiff, in the wake of the pleadings and evidence on record is entitled for a decree as sought by him for change of his name?
3. The appellant-plaintiff filed a suit in O.S.No.265/2007 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.), Davanagere seeking declaration that he shall be called by the new name Shashank Sangappa -4- Mali with effect from the date of judgment and decree and that he would sign as Shashank Sangappa Mali. He also sought for a mandatory injunction against defendants 1 to 9 to replace his old name Huccheshwara by his new name Shashank in all testimonials, admission registers and other school records maintained by the defendants.
4. The plaintiff arrayed the Head Master of the School where he was studying in S.S.L.C as defendant No.1. The Block Education Officer, Gangavathi, the Deputy Director of Public Instructions, Koppal and several other officials including the State Government, represented by the Chief Secretary and also the Deputy Commissioner, Davanagere District were arrayed as party defendants.
5. The main basis for the judgment and decree sought by the plaintiff was that he was studying in S.S.L.C in Mandara Public School and that he was being called as Huccheshwara, as per the name given to him by his parents, which was not to his liking. He -5- further asserted that his friends used to call him as Huccha (meaning a mad person) which embarassed him. Therefore, with the consent of his parents, he had decided to change his name as Shashank and get necessary alterations in this regard in the school records. He got issued a legal notice to the defendants requesting them to replace his old name by the new name Shashank. The Head Mistress of the first defendant High School informed the plaintiff to obtain a decree from the Court as was required by the notification issued by the State Government, if at all he intended to effect any change in his name. Similarly, the Block Education Officer also informed by giving a reply to the legal notice that the plaintiff has to obtain a decree from the competent Court. It is in this background, the plaintiff filed the suit seeking necessary judgment and decree for changing his name from Huccheshwara to Shashank. The plaintiff also incidentally asserted in the plaint that as per the horoscope, his name ought to have been Shashank, but he was wrongly named as Huccha by his parents. -6-
6. The official-defendants particularly, defendants 2, 3 and 5 to 9 contested the suit denying the averments made in the plaint. They also contended that there was no basis for his assertion that his original name Huccheshwara did not tally with the horoscope. Based on the pleadings, the trial Court framed the following issues:
"1) whether the plaintiff proved that his name Huccheshwara did not tally with the horoscope and the proposed name Shashank, in fact tallied with his horoscope?
2) whether the plaintiff is entitled for mandatory injunction as sought?"
7. On behalf of the plaintiff, father of the minor plaintiff was examined as PW-1. Exs.P-1 to P-11 were produced and marked. The defendants did not lead any evidence. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff had not got the proposed change in his name published in the official Gazette and that he had failed to establish that his name Huccheshwara did not -7- tally with the horoscope and that the proposed name Shashank tallied with his horoscope.
8. Aggrieved by this judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the appellant preferred Regular Appeal No.55/2008 on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Davanagere. The learned Appellate Judge has also confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court holding that the plaintiff had failed to establish that his original name Huccheshwara did not tally with his horoscope, on the other hand, the proposed name Shashank tallied with the horoscope and therefore, he was not justified in asking for change of his name.
9. The learned Counsel for both parties have addressed their arguments on the questions of law framed. They have taken me through the pleadings, the evidence on record and the various documents that are exhibited particularly, the legal notice issued and the reply given by defendants 1 and 2.
-8-
10. As can be seen from the plaint averments, the specific case of the plaintiff is that he was feeling serious embarrassment in the school on account of the name by which he was being called as Huccheshwara. It is urged by him that he was undergoing serious discomfort and embarrassment as his friends were calling him as Huccha meaning "a mad fellow". It is this embarrassment that made him to speak to his parents, whereupon they took a decision to have the name changed so that the young boy gets out of the embarrassing situation each time his friends called him by his name.
11. The legal notice issued by the plaintiff through his father met with a reply stating that they had to approach the Civil Court and obtain a decree. Exs.P-9 and P-10 are the reply given by the Block Education Officer, Gangavathi, defendant No.2 and the Head Mistress of the Good Shepherd Higher Primary School, Gangavathi, defendant No.1 respectively, wherein they have categorically stated by referring to a Government Circular dated 2.5.2000 that the appellant herein had to -9- obtain a decree from the Civil Court as per the Government Notification. This being the background in which the plaintiff was constrained to approach the Civil Court, as is apparent from the pleadings in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the plaint, the trial Court misdirected itself in confining the scope of the suit by framing the issue stating "whether the plaintiff proved that his name Huccheshwara did not tally with the horoscope and that the proposed name Shashank tallied with the horoscope." The trial Court completely lost sight of the fact that the plaintiff faced serious embarrassment in his class, when his fellow students addressed him as huchcha (a mad fellow), taking advantage of the name given to him by his parents as Huccheshwara.
12. The trial Court totally lost sight of the basis of the grievance made by the plaintiff and the cause of action for filing the suit which indeed had the origin in the serious embarrassment faced by the plaintiff being called by his name Huccheshwara. He, therefore, intended to have his name changed as Shashank. -10- Whether his name Huccheshwara did not tally with his horoscope and the name Shashank tallied with the horoscope was not germane. But, the Courts below have mechanically proceeded in the matter by framing an issue in that regard and answering the same in the negative holding that neither the horoscope had been produced nor the purohit, who could read the horoscope was examined and therefore, the plaintiff had failed to establish his case. To say the least, the Courts below have adopted a perverse approach in understanding the pleadings and the evidence on record.
13. In so far as the merits of the claim made by the plaintiff regarding the change of his name, he has produced Exs.P-9 and P-10 to show that the defendants themselves, by referring to the Government Notification dated 2.5.2000 have informed the plaintiff to approach the Civil Court and obtain a decree, if he intended to have a change in his name. They have refused to effect change of his name without a decree from the Court. -11-
14. It is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader that such a Circular has been issued by the State Government and the persons who intend to have their names changed have to obtain a decree from the competent Court. Nothing is placed on record to show that any other legal requirement is to be followed either by way of effecting publication in the Official Gazette or by following any other procedure for obtaining a decree from the Civil Court. In this view of the matter, both the Courts were in error in dismissing the suit.
15. In my considered view, the pleadings, the evidence on record and the stand taken by the defendants as per Exs.P-9 and P-10 make it very clear that the plaintiff was right and justified in approaching the Civil Court seeking a decree for change of his name. He was entitled to approach the Court as he had a cause of action because of the serious embarrassment faced by him as his friends were calling him as Huccha. In such circumstances, in the absence of any legal impediment and in view of the embarrassment that the plaintiff has been undergoing, the plaintiff has made out -12- a case for passing a judgment and decree as sought by him. The substantial questions are accordingly answered in favour of the appellant.
16. The appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree passed by the Courts below are set aside. The suit filed by the plaintiff is decreed granting the declaratory relief and mandatory injunction as sought for by him. In the circumstances of the case, the parties to bear their respective costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE nas.