Bangalore District Court
Shwetha. S vs ) The Head Master on 16 July, 2022
KABC010032572021
Govt. of Karnataka TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENT IN SUITS
Form No.9(Civil)
Title Sheet for
Judgment in suits
(R.P.91)
IN THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BENGALURU CITY
(CCCH.11)
Dated this the 16th day of July 2022
PRESENT: Sri. D.P. KUMARA SWAMY, B.Com., LL.M.,
(Name of the Presiding Judge)
O.S.NO.1013/2021
PLAINTIFF SHWETHA. S
Formerly called as S.Swetha
Aged about 32 years
D/o.Sri.Subbanna Chari
R/a No.5/5, S.V.T.Colony, Hejala Gate
Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagar District
RAMANAGAR - 562 109.
[By Pleader Sri.B.S.Muralidhara]
/Vs/
DEFENDANTS 1) THE HEAD MASTER
OS.NO.1013/2021
2
Basaveshwara Girls High School
2nd Block, Rajajinagar
Bengaluru - 560 010.
2) HEAD MASTER
Yashas Vidya Kendra
No.26, Somashettihalli
Near Panchayath Office
Chikkabanawara Post
Bengaluru - 560 090.
3) THE PRINCIPAL
Regional Vocational Training Institute
for Women
Hosur Road, Bengaluru - 560 029.
[D.1 to D.3 - Exparte]
4) THE SECRETARY
Office of the Deputy Director of
Public Instructions
Nrupatunga Road
Bengaluru.
5) THE SECRETARY
Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board
6th Cross, Malleshwaram
Bengaluru - 560 003.
[D.4 & D.5 - Smt.Lohitheshwari -
III ADGP]
Date of Institution of the suit : 06.02.2021
Nature of the Suit : Declaration
Date of commencement of recording
of evidence : 04.03.2022
OS.NO.1013/2021
3
Date on which the Judgment was
pronounced : 16.07.2022
Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total Duration : 01 05 10
(D.P. KUMARA SWAMY)
VI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE
BENGALURU CITY
JUDGMENT
This is a suit for declaration of names and for consequential corrections in the school records of the plaintiff.
2. The pleaded facts of the case of the plaintiff may be stated to the following effect :
2.1 The plaintiff is born on 05.01.1998. She is named as 'SHWETHA .S". At the time of admission of the plaintiff to the school, the name of the plaintiff has been given as "S. Swetha, daughter of OS.NO.1013/2021 4 Subbanna Chari". However, in the 7th and 10th marks cards of the plaintiff, the name of the plaintiff is mentioned as "SWEETHA.S daughter of Subbanna" instead of "SHWETHA.S daughter of Subbanna Chari". In the Provisional National Trade Certificate also, the name of the plaintiff is shown as 'Swetha S daughter of Subbanna' instead of "Shwetha .S daughter of Subbanna Chari". The plaintiff noticed the said mistakes in the said records very recently. The plaintiff has notified regarding the change of her name and her father's name by swearing an affidavit on 04.02.2020. The father of the plaintiff has also sworn to an affidavit dated 04.02.2020 regarding the said names. At the time of admission of the plaintiff to the school her name was given as 'Shwetha.S daughter of Subbanna Chari'.
2.2 The plaintiff approached the defendants and informed them about the said mistakes and requested them for necessary corrections in the OS.NO.1013/2021 5 said documents. The defendants have informed the plaintiff that since she has completed her SSLC, she should obtain a decree from a competent Court.
They have issued an endorsement dated 18.05.2020 to the said effect. It is necessary for effecting corrections in the marks cards, transfer certificate, degree marks cards, certificates and other records of the plaintiff regarding the correct names of the plaintiff and her father. The above are the facts constituting the cause of action for the suit. Hence, this suit.
3. The pleaded facts of the case of the defendants No.4 and 5 may be stated to the following effect. In view of the Circular issued by the Commissioner of the Education department, Government of Karnataka, there is no provision for changing the name and other particulars of a student in the school records. The suit is barred by time. There is no cause of action for the suit. These defendants have categorically denied the OS.NO.1013/2021 6 pleaded facts of the case of the plaintiff giving rise to the alleged cause of action. The suit may be dismissed.
4. Based on the pleadings and other materials on record, this Court has framed the following Issues:
1) Does plaintiff prove that her correct name is "Shwetha.S" instead of "Swetha.S"?
2) Do defendants No.4 and 5 prove that suit filed by plaintiff is barred by limitation ?
3) Do defendants No.4 and 5 prove that, in view of Circular issued by the Commissioner of Education Department, there is no provision to change the name of student in school records ?
4) Do defendants No.4 and 5 prove that plaintiff has no cause of action to file this suit ?
5) What Order or Decree ?
5. The plaintiff got herself examined as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.10 and got closed her OS.NO.1013/2021 7 side. The Defendants No.4 and 5 have not adduced any evidence and the learned III Additional District Government Pleader (ADGP) has submitted that there is no independent evidence on behalf of the Defendants No. 4 and 5. The Defendants No.1 to 3 are ex-parte.
6. Heard the arguments of the learned Advocate for the plaintiff and that of the learned III ADGP.
7. My findings on the Issues are as follows:
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative. Further plaintiff has proved that the name of her father is "Subbanna Chari"
Issue No.2 : In the Negative Issue No.3 : In the Negative Issue No.4 : In the Negative Issue No.5 : As per the final order, for the following:
OS.NO.1013/2021 8 REASONS
8. Issue No.1 : The pleaded facts of the case of the plaintiff in support of the relief for declaration of the name of the plaintiff and that of her father and for consequential corrections of the said name in the school records are noted supra.
9. The plaintiff got entered into the witness box and got herself examined as PW.1 and on oath, submitted her examination-in-chief by way of affidavit. Therein, the PW.1 has reiterated the pleaded facts of her case.
10. The PW.1 is cross-examined on behalf of the defendants. In the cross-examination the PW.1 has stated to the following effect. It is true that as per the information provided by the parents at the time of admission of a student, the school authorities would record the name and other particulars of the student in the school records OS.NO.1013/2021 9 pertaining to the concerned student. It is true that every year the parents would obtain the marks card of the students. It is asked to PW.1 as to whether no effort was made to get the spelling mistakes in the name of the plaintiff and her father in the concerned school records of the plaintiff. The reply of PW.1 is that the concerned persons of the school told that it would not cause any problem. The plaintiff has produced documents to show that the name of her father is 'Subbanna Chari'. It is true that the parents of the plaintiff are responsible for the mistakes in the name of the plaintiff and that of her father in the concerned school records of the plaintiff. Before proceeding further, it may be noted that the plaintiff has sought for correction of her name so as to delete "Sweetha.S' and to insert in its place "Shwetha.S" in the school records of the plaintiff. Bearing in mind all these aspects, let me consider the documentary evidence adduced by the plaintiff.
OS.NO.1013/2021 10
11. Ex.P.1 is the duplicate copy of the Transfer Certificate dated 12.03.2020 issued by the defendant No.2 school. Therein the name of the plaintiff is written as "Shwetha.S" and I find that it is written as 'Shweetha.S' and thereafter, the second letter 'e' in the said name is overwritten as 't'. In other words, originally, the said name was written as 'shweetha.S' and thereafter, due to overwriting, the said word is written as "Shwetha.S". In Ex.P.1, the name of the father of the plaintiff is written as 'Subbanna Chari". 11.2 Ex.P.2 is the SSLC marks card of the plaintiff dated 08.05.2004. In Ex.P.2, the name of the plaintiff is written as 'Sweetha.S'. The name of the father of the plaintiff is written as 'Subbanna'. 11.3 Ex.P.3 is the VII standard marks card of the plaintiff. In Ex.P.3, the name of the plaintiff and that of her father are written as 'SWEETHA .S' and 'SUBBANNA' respectively.
OS.NO.1013/2021 11 11.4 Ex.P.4 is the Provisional National Trade Certificate of the plaintiff. In Ex.P.4, the names of the plaintiff and her father are written as 'SWETHA. S' and 'SUBBANNA'.
11.5 Ex.P.5 is the affidavit of the plaintiff dated 04.02.2020, wherein the plaintiff has stated on oath that in the school records of the plaintiff in LKG and 1st standard her name is written as 'S.SWETHA' instead of "SHWETHA .S". She has further stated to the effect that her father's name is written as 'SUBBANNA' instead of 'SUBBANNACHARI' in her said school records.
11.6 Ex.P.6 is the affidavit of the father of the plaintiff dated 04.02.2020. Therein the father of the plaintiff has declared that his name is 'SUBBANNACHARI' and that in the school records of the plaintiff his name is written as 'SUBBANNA'.
OS.NO.1013/2021 12 11.7 Ex.P.7 is the Aadhaar Card of the plaintiff where the name of the plaintiff is shown as 'Shwetha S' and the name of her father is shown as 'Subbanna Chari'.
11.8 Ex.P.8 is the Passbook of the S.B A/c of the plaintiff in State Bank of India, Bidadi Branch, Bengaluru Mysore Road, Bengaluru, wherein the name of the plaintiff is shown as 'SHWETHA S' and the name of her father is shown as 'SUBBANNA CHAIR'.
11.9 The plaintiff has produced (but not got marked ) her S.B A/c Passbook of Canara Bank of Hejjala Branch, wherein her name is written as 'SHWETHA .S' and her father's name is written as 'SUBBANNA CHARI'.
11.10 Ex.P9 is the endorsement dated 18.05.2020, wherein the BEO has called upon the plaintiff to secure a decree from the competent OS.NO.1013/2021 13 Court for changing the name of the plaintiff and that of her father in the school records of the plaintiff.
11.11 It may be noted that the Issue framed by this Court indicates that the plaintiff has to prove that her name is 'Shwetha.S', but not 'Swetha.S'. In Issue No.1 the wrong name ought to have been shown as 'Sweetha.S', but not 'Swetha.S'. Another problem in Issue No.1 is that it is not indicated that the plaintiff has to prove that her father's name is 'Subbanna Chari' but not 'Subbanna'. In fact, the plaintiff has pleaded and sought for relief to the said effect. No separate issue is framed regarding the correct name of the father of the plaintiff. Let that as it may, the written statement filed by the defendants and the cross-examination conducted on behalf of the defendants would go to indicate that the parties have participated in the trial of the suit bearing in mind the fact that the issue regarding the correct name of the father of the OS.NO.1013/2021 14 plaintiff is under consideration in this suit. Both the parties have led evidence in support of their respective contentions and also in refutation of the contentions of the rival parties. Hence, no prejudice is caused in not framing the issue regarding the correct name of the father of the plaintiff. In this regard, I am guided by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2022 (2) KCCR 961 (SC) APMC Yashwanthapur through its Secretary Vs. M/s.Selva Foods through its Managing Partner wherein at para-11, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ruled thus :
"11. Omission to frame an issue as required under Order XIV, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 does not vitiate the trial where the parties go to trial fully knowing the rival case and lead evidence in support of their respective contensions and to refute contentions of the other side (See - Kannan (Dead) by LRs. And Others Vs. V.S.Pandurangam (Dead) by LRs and Others, (2007) 15 SCC 157 and Nedunuri Kameswaramma Vs. Sampati Subba Rao, AIR 1963 SC
884)."
OS.NO.1013/2021 15 11.12 To the same effect are the judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in (1) 2008
94) LJ 735 Shamrao Rukamanna Talwar Vs. Smt.Survarna, and (2) 2008(2) KLJ 342 (ILR 2007 KAR 2894) K.S.Venkatesh Vs. N.G.Lakshminarayana & Ors.
11.13 On consideration of the pleadings, oral evidence and the documentary evidence, I am satisfied that on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities the plaintiff has proved that her correct name is 'SHWETHA.S' and that the correct name of her father is 'SUBBANNA CHARI'. Hence, Issue No.1 is held in the affirmative. It is further held that the plaintiff has proved that the name of her father is 'SUBBANNA CHARI'.
12. Issue No.2 : The period of limitation would be the point of time when the claim of the plaintiff is denied by the defendants. As per the plaint averments, it is on 18.05.2020 that the OS.NO.1013/2021 16 defendants have denied the claim of the plaintiff for corrections of her name and her father's name in her school records. From the said date the suit is in time. Hence, Issue No.2 is held in the negative.
13. Issue No.3 : The circular of the Government says that after the student has completed SSLC, the school authorities should not make changes in the name and other particulars of a student in the school records by themselves and that they must insist for a decree from the competent Court. In that view of the matter it cannot be said that the bar created under the Circular is absolute. The said bar is subject to a decree to be produced by the concerned student. In that view of the matter the allegations in the written statement that there is no provision for effecting change in the name and other particulars of the plaintiff in her school records is neither OS.NO.1013/2021 17 tenable nor acceptable. Hence, Issue No.3 is held in the negative.
14. Issue No.4 : The above discussed facts would clearly indicate that there is cause of action for the suit. Hence, Issue No.4 is held in the negative.
15. Issue No.5 : Hence, the following :
ORDER (1) The suit is decreed. No order as to costs.
(2) It is declared that the name of the plaintiff is "SHWETHA .S". It is also declared that the name of the father of the plaintiff is "SUBBANNA CHARI".
(3) Issue directions to the defendants to delete the wrong name of the plaintiff 'SWEETHA .S' and to insert the correct name of the plaintiff as "SHWETHA.S" and likewise, to OS.NO.1013/2021 18 insert the correct name of the father of the plaintiff as "SUBBANNA CHARI" in place of his existing incorrect name 'SUBBANNA' in the school records of the plaintiff.
(4) Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed and computerized by her, transcript thereof corrected and then pronounced by me in open court, on this the 16th day of July 2022) (D.P. KUMARA SWAMY) VI Addl.City Civil & Sessions Judge Bengaluru City OS.NO.1013/2021 19 ANNEXURE I. List of witnesses examined on behalf of :
(a) Plaintiff's side :
P.W.1 - Smt.Shwetha.S dtd,04.03.2022
(b) Defendants side : N I L II. List of documents exhibited on behalf of :
(a) Plaintiff's side :
Ex.P.1 Duplicate copy of Transfer Certificate of plaintiff issued by defendant No.2 School Ex.P.2 Original SSLC Marks card of plaintiff issued by defendant No.5 Ex.P.3 Original VII Standard marks card of plaintiff isused by defendant No.4 Ex.P.4 Provisional National Trade Certificate of plaintiff issued by defendant No.3 Ex.P.5 Affidavit of plaintiff declaring her correct name before Notary dtd.04.02.2020 Ex.P.6 Affidavit of Sri.Subbannachari, declaring his correct name before Notary dtd.04.02.2020 Ex.P.7 Original Aadhaar Card of plaintiff Ex.P.8 State Bank of India SB A/c pass book of plaintiff OS.NO.1013/2021 20 Ex.P.9 Endorsement issued by BEO, North Zone-1, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru - 560 010 Ex.P.10 Paper Publication in 'Kannada Prabha' kannada daily newspaper dtd.31.03.2022
(b) Defendants side : N I L VI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU CITY OS.NO.1013/2021 21