Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Kumar Atharv S/O. Vishwanath Gundagi vs The Registrar Of Births And ... on 26 February, 2026

                                                 -1-
                                                                NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                                             WP No. 103535 of 2025


                      HC-KAR



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD

                         DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                           BEFORE

                       THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                         WRIT PETITION NO.103535 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

                      BETWEEN:
                      KUMAR ATHARV S/O. VISHWANATH GUNDAGI,
                      AGE. 11 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
                      SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY THE MINOR
                      GUARDIAN HIS MATERNAL GRAND FATHER
                      SHASHIKANT S/O. MEGHARAJ MALGATTE,
                      AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
                      R/O. #96, UGAR KHURD, TQ. ATHANI,
                      DIST. BELAGAVI-591316.
                                                                        ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. GIRISH A.YADAWAD, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:
                      THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS
                      /CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
                      CONTONMENT BOARD, BELAGAVI,
                      DIST. BELAGAVI-590001.
Digitally signed by                                                    ...RESPONDENT
VIJAYALAKSHMI M
KANKUPPI              (BY SRI. APOORVA SOMANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                    THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
KARNATAKA             OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A) ISSUE A WRIT OF
                      CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED
                      02.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT IN NO.9/SAN/114/CGH 35
                      VIDE ANNEXURE-H, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. B)
                      ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO
                      CHANGE THE NAME OF PETITIONER AS 'ATHARV V. GUNDAGI' IN THE
                      REGISTER OF BIRTHS MAINTAINED BY THE RESPONDENT AS AGAINST
                      THE ORIGINALLY REGISTERED NAME 'KRISHNA V. GUNDAGI' AND TO
                      ISSUE A FRESH BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE PETITIONER, IN THE
                      INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. C) PASS SUCH ORDER OR
                      ORDERS WHICH THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND NECESSARY
                      UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE
                      INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
                                    -2-
                                                 NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                             WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR



      THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
12.02.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER THIS DAY,
THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM:       THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

                               CAV ORDER

     The present writ petition is filed seeking the following

prayer:

                                 "PRAYER
          WHEREFORE, it is prayed for this Hon'ble court may be
          pleased to:

          a) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned
          endorsement dated 02.04.2025 issued by the
          respondent in No.9/SAN/114/CGH 35 vide Annexure-
          H, in the interest of justice and equity.

          b) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent
          to change the name of petitioner as 'Atharv V.
          Gundagi' in the Register of Births maintained by the
          respondent as against the originally registered name
          'Krishna V. Gundagi' and to issue a fresh birth
          certificate to the petitioner, in the interest of justice
          and equity.

          c) Pass such order or orders which this Hon'ble court
          deems fit and necessary under the facts and
          circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice
          and equity."



     2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was

born on 17.09.2014 at the Military Hospital, Belagavi. The birth

certificate came to be issued by the respondent showing the

name of the petitioner as "Krishna V.Gundagi". The father of the

petitioner is working in the Indian Army and as a result, the
                                -3-
                                            NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                        WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




parents of the petitioner often reside away from the petitioner

depending upon the posting of the father of the petitioner. The

petitioner is under the care and custody of his maternal

grandfather namely Shashikant Malagatte. Hence, the parents of

the petitioner have executed a Special Power of Attorney in

favour of the maternal grandfather for the purpose of initiating

legal proceedings.


      3. It is stated that based on family traditions, the name of

the petitioner was initially named 'Krishna' and the same upon

being informed to the respondent was recorded in the birth

certificate. Subsequently, the parents of the petitioner decided to

officially name the petitioner as 'Atharv'. This change of name

was in the best interest of the child and for his better

identification for the purpose of educational and other official

records. Accordingly, in the school records, the name of the

petitioner is mentioned as 'Atharv V. Gundagi' and not 'Krishna

V. Gundagi'. At the time of taking admission of the petitioner for

4th standard, due to the variation of the name of the petitioner in

the school records in comparison with the birth certificate, there

was difficulty for proceeding further and the parents of the
                                 -4-
                                              NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                          WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




petitioner were directed to get the name in the birth certificate

changed. Therefore, the petitioner was advised to file a suit

before the Civil Court seeking declaration with regard to change

of name. Accordingly, the petitioner instituted the suit in

O.S.No.960/2023 against the respondent on the file of the III

Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Belagavi, seeking a declaration

in that regard.


      4. The said suit came to be dismissed by judgment and

order dated 10.11.2023 on the ground of limitation. Aggrieved

by   the   same,   the   petitioner   preferred   regular   appeal   in

RA.No.19/2024 and the same also came to be dismissed by

judgment and order dated 31.01.2024 confirming the judgment

and decree passed in O.S.No.960/2023. It is submitted that the

suit was filed by the petitioner on the mistaken notion that the

name mentioned in the birth certificate was wrong. The trial

Court and the first appellate Court dismissed the suit on the

ground that, the limitation for seeking a declaration with respect

to change of name is 3 years and the suit is filed beyond the said

period of limitation and the same is not maintainable.
                                  -5-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                         WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




      5. It is submitted that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

case of Master Adhrith Bhat Vs. The Registrar of Births and

Deaths, Udupi City Muncipality Council arising out of

WP.No.6370/2024 dated 06.02.2025 while considering a

similar issue with respect to change of name, after elaborately

considering the provisions of Registration of Births and Deaths

Act, 1969 and the Karnataka Registration of Births and Deaths

Rules, 1999 and having noticed that there is no provision in the

Act or the Rules with respect to change of name of a person has

laid down the procedure at paragraph Nos.25 to 32 thereby

directing the authorities to change the name in the Register of

Births and Deaths after following the said procedure.


      6. It is submitted that in the light of the said judgment, the

petitioner   approached    the    respondent    by   submitting    a

representation dated 27.02.2025 requesting to change the name

of the petitioner from 'Krishna' to 'Atharv' in the birth certificate

by narrating the above facts. An affidavit executed by the power

of attorney of the parents of the petitioner was also submitted

along with the said representation in accordance with the order

passed in WP.No.6370/2024. In response to the above said
                                -6-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                         WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




representation submitted by the petitioner, the respondent has

issued the impugned endorsement dated 02.04.2025 stating that

the modification of entries in the Register of Births and Deaths

can be made only by virtue of an order of the Court and directing

the petitioner to submit an order of the Court for consideration of

the request. It is stated that respondent ought to have accepted

the request of the petitioner for change of name in terms of the

judgment passed by this Court in WP.No.6370/2024. Aggrieved

by the endorsement dated 02.04.2025 issued by the respondent,

the petitioner has come before this Court.


      7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on

paragraph Nos.17 to 36 of the judgment in case of Master

Adhrith Bhat referred supra which reads as follows:


      "17. As could be seen from above, Rule 10 provides
      that where the birth of any child had been registered
      without any name, the parent or guardian of such child
      is required to give information regarding the name of
      the child within 12 months and thereafter by virtue of
      Section 14 of the Act, the entries were required to be
      made. The proviso to Rule 10 also states the procedure
      to be followed if the information is provided after the
      period of 12 months has lapsed but within a period of
      15 years from the date of registration.

      18. It would therefore be clear that under the Rules, if
      no name has been furnished at the time of registration
      of the birth, the parent can within an outer limit of 15
      years from the date of registration furnish the name of
                                -7-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                         WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR



     the child and ensure that it had been entered in the
     Birth Certificate.

     19. However, in the instant case, it is stated that the
     petitioner's father had given his son a new name and
     therefore, the entry in the Birth Register was also to be
     modified.

     20. There is admittedly no provision under the Act or
     the Rules which provide for change of name which is
     already registered. This is therefore an obvious
     anomaly which would create unnecessary hardship to
     the parents or to the child in case they desire to have
     the name changed.

     21. It is common practice in our country that a person
     decides to give himself a new name or that a parent
     decides to change the name though he has already
     been given a name. In fact, it is a practice in our
     country that multiple names are given, but one name is
     entered in the records and this, at times, creates
     confusion regarding the identity of the person.

     22. The Legislature would have to take a view on this
     and ensure that the citizens are not put to any hardship
     whenever they desire to change their names and
     evolve a procedure where the records of that particular
     person are also changed simultaneously in all the
     public records or at least in the relevant records.

     23. In fact, the Law Commission of Karnataka in its 24th
     Report1 furnished on 20.07.2013 regarding Change of
     Name, suggesting amendments to the Act and the
     Rules. However, the Legislature does not appear to
     have taken the matter further.

     _______________________________
     1
      Law Commission of Karnataka Twenty Fourth Report, dated
     20.07.2013; Re : Change of Name
     - Amendment to the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,
     1969.

     The relevant suggestions AND the recommendation read as
     under :

     "SUGGESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION:

     (C) Right to change one's name: A person who is known or
     described in any manner may give up describing or being
     known in that manner and choose any other name"
                                  -8-
                                                NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                            WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




     (H) Change of name recorded in the birth certificate shall be
     made for any of the following
     reasons:
          (i) bona fide desire of the applicant;
          (ii) marriage/remarriage,
          (iii) divorce,
          (iv) adoption;
          (v) religious conversion/re-conversion;
          (vi) change of nationality and
          (vii) change of sex.

     "RECOMMENDATIONS:

     29) A) For the reasons stated above, the Commission
     recommends to the Government of Karnataka to take steps to
     amend the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969 after
     due compliance with the provisions of Article 254 of the
     Constitution of India, as follows:

          "15A. Change of name entered in the Register of
          Births & Deaths: Any person whose name is entered
          in the Register of Births and Deaths in the State of
          Karnataka and whose name is entered in the
          Register of Births and Deaths in any other State and
          has been staying in the State of Karnataka for a
          prescribed period shall be entitled to seek change of
          his name in the Register of Births in accordance with
          the rules of procedure prescribed by the State of
          Karnataka in this behalf."

     B) The Commission further recommends that after Section
     15A is added it shall frame exhaustive Rules for giving effect
     to the said provisions bearing in mind of the suggestions
     made by the Commission in paragraph No.28."

     24. It would therefore be appropriate for the
     Legislature to take necessary action pursuant to the
     recommendation of Law Commission in its 24th report.

     25. Since there is no provision under the Act or the
     Rules for change of name, a piquant situation has
     arisen which requires to be resolved in such a manner
     that neither authorities nor the applicants are
     prejudiced.

     26. Since there is no law which prescribes the
     procedure for changing the name of a person, it would
     be impermissible for the parents of a child to seek for
     changing the name that is already registered in the
     register of births and deaths until a relevant law is
     provided for by the Legislature.
                                -9-
                                             NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                         WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




     27. This could be achieved by calling upon the parents
     to give a sworn affidavit to the effect that they have
     changed the name of the child on their own accord and
     the entries in the birth register would be required to be
     changed accordingly.

     28. On such a request being given, the authorities
     should verify the identity of the parents and proceed to
     incorporate the changed name in the Register of Births.

     29. The authorities, in order to ensure that there is no
     attempt to create a record for ulterior purposes, should
     make a remark in the register stating that the name of
     the child had been changed subsequently pursuant to a
     request made by the parents. The register would
     therefore have an entry regarding the name which was
     originally entered and also a name which was entered
     subsequently on their request.

     30. If such an endorsement is incorporated in the Birth
     Certificate as well, the possibility of any misuse would
     also be avoided.

     31. In fact, even in respect of an adult who seeks for a
     change of name, the same procedure can be adopted.
     Since the original name would also be contained in the
     register and also the new name, the possibility of this
     document being misused for an ulterior purpose can
     easily be prevented.

     32. Thus, until the appropriate provisions are made
     under the Rules by the State in this regard, the
     concerned authorities are directed to follow the
     aforementioned procedures and permit the change of
     name in the Register of Births and Deaths.

     33. It has to be noticed here that, since the date of
     birth or the date of death and other details would
     remain unchanged, there can be no impediment or
     reason to prevent the change of name.

     34. It is, however, made clear that in case of deaths,
     the question of changing the name would not arise and
     hence, these directions would be inapplicable.

     35. In light of the above, the impugned endorsement
     dated 04.11.2023 is quashed. The respondent authority
     is hereby directed to change the name of the petitioner
                                - 10 -
                                              NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                          WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR



      as Shrijith Bhat in the Register of Births as against the
      originally registered name Adhrith Bhat.

      36. As already noticed above, necessary endorsement
      shall be made in the Register of Births and also in the
      Birth Certificate that the original name of Adhrith Bhat
      was changed to Shrijith Bhat, as requested in the
      application dated 04.11.2023 and issue a fresh Birth
      Certificate accordingly."


      8. Relying on this judgment, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that in the interest of the child, when the

parents want to change the name of the child from 'Krishna' to

'Atharv', in the light of the judgment, the respondents ought to

have accepted the request of the petitioner.


      9. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as

there is no provision in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act,

1969, the respondents are not in a position to consider the

request of the petitioner for change of name.


      10. Having heard the learned counsels on either side,

perused the entire material on record. The petitioner is 12 years

old and his parents want to change his name from 'Krishna

V.Gundagi' to 'Atharv V.Gundagi'. In the school records, it is

already mentioned as 'Atharv V.Gundagi'. A Co-ordinate Bench of

this Court in Master Adhrith Bhat's case referred supra had
                                - 11 -
                                                NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                            WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




observed that in fact, the Law Commission of Karnataka in its

24th Report furnished on 20.07.2013 regarding Change of Name,

suggested amendments to the Act and the Rules. It is also

observed that admittedly, when there is no provision under the

Act or the rules for change of name, which is an obvious anomaly

which would create unnecessary hardship to the parents or to

the child in case they desire to have the name changed, issued

slew of directions to the authorities. In the said judgment, it is

observed that the authorities in order to ensure that there is no

attempt to create a record for ulterior purposes, should make a

remark in the register stating that the name of the child had

been changed subsequently pursuant to a request made by the

parents. The register would therefore have an entry regarding

the name which was originally entered and also the name which

was   entered   subsequently    on      their   request.   If   such   an

endorsement is incorporated in the Birth Certificate as well, the

possibility of any misuse would also be avoided. In the facts and

circumstances of the case where the parents want to change the

name of the child, in the light of the judgment in Master

Adhrith Bhat's case referred supra, this Court is passing the

following:
                                   - 12 -
                                                      NC: 2026:KHC-D:3084
                                                WP No. 103535 of 2025


HC-KAR




                                 ORDER

i. The impugned endorsement dated 02.04.2025 issued by the respondent No.9 is set aside and respondent No.9 is directed to change the name of petitioner as 'Atharv V.Gundagi' in the Register of Births maintained by the respondent as against the originally registered name 'Krishna V. Gundagi' and to issue a fresh birth certificate to the petitioner.

ii. The respondents shall make a remark in the Register of Births about the change of name, pursuant to the request made by the parents and the Register should reflect both the original name and also the present name.

iii. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

iv. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.

Sd/-

JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MEG CT: UMD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2