Bangalore District Court
Jagadish N vs Karnataka School Examination And ... on 4 December, 2025
KABC010142432025
IN THE COURT OF XXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 4th Day of December 2025
Present : SRI.VEDAMOORTHY B.S., B.A.(L)., LL.B.,
XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-14)
O.S.No.4012/2025
PLAINTIFFS : 1. Sri.Jagadish N.,
Aged about 47 years,
S/o Sri.Lakshmana,
Residing at No.312, 12th Cross,
2nd Main, Bagalakunte,
Bengaluru - 560 073.
2. Shawetha Samrudhi,
Aged about 16 years,
D/o Jagadish N.,
Residing at No.312, 12th Cross,
2nd Main, Bagalakunte,
Bengaluru - 560 073,
Since Minor Rep,
By Natural Guardian Father
Sri.Jagadish N.
(By Sri.T.P.Shivananda, Advocate)
V/s
DEFENDANTS : 1. Karnataka School Examination
& Assessment Board,
6th Cross, Malleshwaram,
Bengaluru - 560 003.
2
O.S.No.4012/2025
Rep. by Secretary.
2. Head Master,
Government High School,
Bagalakunte, Nagasandra Post,
Ward No.14, Bengaluru North,
Bengaluru - 560 073.
3. State of Karnataka,
Rep. by Chief Secretary,
Vidhanasoudha,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
(By Sri.M.Maruthi, the learned 4 th
Additional District Government Pleader)
Date of institution of the suit. 09.06.2025
Nature of the suit Declaration
Date of the commencement of 15.11.2025
recording evidence
Date on which the Judgment 04.12.2025
was pronounced
Years Months Days
Total duration
00 05 25
(VEDAMOORTHY B.S.)
XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
3
O.S.No.4012/2025
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs have filed this suit against the defendants for judgment and decree to declare the name of the 1st plaintiff from "Jagadish" to "Jagadish N." in the school Transfer Certificate bearing Admission No.169/2021-22 and SSLC Marks Statement cum Certificate bearing No.24032106 of the 2 nd plaintiff.
2. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are that the 1st defendant has issued a Provisional Marks Statement of the 2nd plaintiff in the year 2024 bearing registration No.20240789282. In the said Marks Statement, there is a typographical error wherein, the name of the 1 st plaintiff has been wrongly mentioned as "Jagadish" instead of "Jagadish N.". The 2nd defendant has issues a school Transfer Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff bearing Admission No.169/2021-22. In the said school Transfer Certificate, the name of the 1st plaintiff is wrongly mentioned as "Jagadish" instead of "Jagadish N.". Due to the aforesaid discrepancy in the form of typographical error, the 2nd plaintiff undergoing extreme difficulty to avail to admission in 4 O.S.No.4012/2025 college. On 24.01.2025, the 1 st plaintiff issued a Legal Notice calling upon the defendants to rectify the error committed by the defendants due to their negligence and change the name of the 1st plaintiff as "Jagadish N." instead of "Jagadish". In the school Transfer Certificate and Provisional/ Statement of the 2 nd plaintiff. The said Legal Notices were served on the defendants. But, they have not replied to the said Legal Notice nor complied. Hence, the plaintiffs have filed this suit.
3. After due service of summons to the defendants, they have appeared before this Court and they have filed their written statement. It is contended in the written statement that the suit is not maintainable either in law or on facts. The allegations made against the defendants are denied as false. Their contentions are that the suit is barred by limitation. There is no cause of action to the plaintiffs to file the present suit. Hence, prayed to dismiss the suit.
4. Based on the pleadings of the parties to the following issues are framed :-
5
O.S.No.4012/2025
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that his name is Jagadish N. and his name is wrongly entered in the school Transfer Certificate of his daughter Kum.Shwethasamrudhi as Jagadish ?
2. Whether the defendants prove that the suit is barred by limitation ?
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs as prayed?
4. What order or decree?
6. To prove the above issues, the plaintiffs have produced the oral evidences of the 1 st plaintiff as PW1. The plaintiffs have also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. The defendants have not produced any evidences either oral or documentary.
7. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsels for the plaintiffs and the defendants. Perused the materials available on record.
8. My answers to the above Issues are as follows;
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.2 : In the Negative,
6
O.S.No.4012/2025
Issue No.3 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
9. ISSUE No.2 :- The defendants in the written statement have contended that the suit is barred by limitation as the suit is filed by the plaintiff after laps of considerable time.
But, they have not explained the date on which, the cause of action arose to the plaintiffs to file the present suit. The defendants have not produced any evidences either oral or documentary to prove this issue. During cross-examination of PW1 also, no suggestions were made that the suit is barred by limitation. Article 113 of the Limitation Act is applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Under Article 113 of the Limitation Act, the period of limitation to file this suit is three years and the date from which the period of limitation begins to run is when the right to sue accrues. On perusal of the pleadings and the documentary evidences produced by the plaintiffs, it appears that on 27.04.2024, the 1st defendant issued the School Transfer Certificate of the 2 nd plaintiff and in the year 2024, the SSLC marks card of the 2 nd plaintiff was issued by the 2nd defendant. It further appears 7 O.S.No.4012/2025 that on 24.01.2025, the 1st plaintiff issued the Legal Notice to the defendants calling upon to the rectify the mistake and while mentioning the name of the 1st plaintiff. From the above pleadings, it appears that right to sue accrued to the plaintiffs in the year 2024 when the SSLC Marks Card of the 2nd plaintiff was issued by the 1 st defendant. From the said date, the suit is within the period of limitation. For the above reasons, the defendants have not proved that the suit is barred by limitation. Hence, I answer Issue No.2 in the Negative.
10 ISSUES No.1 AND 3 :- The findings on these Issues are inter-related. Therefore, they are taken together for consideration.
To prove these issues, on the part of the plaintiffs, the 1st plaintiff has produced his oral evidences as PW1. He has filed his affidavit by way of examination-in-chief. In the said affidavit, he has reiterated the facts stated in the plaint. In support of the above oral evidences, he has also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. Among them, Ex.P1 is the Birth Certificate of the 2 nd plaintiff, Ex.P2 is the office 8 O.S.No.4012/2025 copy of the Legal Notices issued by the plaintiff to defendants No.1 and 2, Ex.P3 is the Postal Receipts, Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 are the Postal Acknowledgments, Ex.P6 is the School Transfer Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff, Ex.P7 is the SSLC Marks Card of the 2nd plaintiff, Ex.P8 is the Aadhar Card of 1st plaintiff and Ex.P9 is the Aadhar Card of the 2nd plaintiff.
11. PW1 is cross-examined on behalf of the defendants. Nothing has been elicited in his cross-examination to disbelieve the above evidences deposed by PW1 in his examination-in-chief.
12. On perusal of the above oral and documentary evidences produced by the plaintiffs, it appears that in Ex.P1 i.e., the Birth Certificate issued by BBMP, the name of the 1 st plaintiff is mentioned as "Jagadish N.". It further appears from the contents of Ex.P8 that in Aadhar Card issued by the competent authority, the name of the 1st plaintiff is mentioned as "Jagadish N.". It appears from the contents of Ex.P6 and Ex.P7 that in the School Transfer Certificate and the SSLC Marks Card, the name of the 1 st plaintiff is mentioned as "Jagadish" instead of "Jagadish N.". Therefore, 9 O.S.No.4012/2025 the plaintiffs have proved that the name of the 1 st plaintiff is "Jagadish N." and his name is wrongly entered in the School Transfer Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff as "Jagadish".
13. It appears from the contents of Ex.P2 to Ex.P4 that defendants No.1 and 2 have not corrected the name of the 1 st plaintiff in Ex.P6 and Ex.P7. Therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled for the reliefs as prayed. Hence, I answer Issues No.1 and 3 in the Affirmative.
14. ISSUE No.4 :- In view of the findings on Issues No.1 and 3, the suit of the plaintiffs is liable to be decreed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDERS The suit of the plaintiffs is hereby decreed.
It is hereby declared that the name of the 1st plaintiff is 'Jagadish N.' instead of 'Jagadish' as mentioned in the School Transfer Certificate bearing Admission No.169/2021-22 and SSLC Marks Statement cum Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff bearing No.24032106.
10
O.S.No.4012/2025 Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the plaintiffs shall bear the costs of the suit.
Draw the decree accordingly.
(Typed by the stenographer in Court Compute on my direct dictation, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court today on this the 4 th day of December 2025).
(VEDAMOORTHY.B.S) XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Plaintiffs :-
PW1 : Jagadish N. List of documents exhibited for Plaintiffs :-
Ex.P1 : Birth Certificate,
Ex.P2 : Office copy of the Legal Notice,
Ex.P3 : Postal Receipts,
Ex.P4 & 5 : Postal Acknowledgments,
Ex.P6 : School Transfer Certificate,
Ex.P7 : SSLC Marks Card,
Ex.P8 & 9 : Aadhar Cards.
11
O.S.No.4012/2025
List of witnesses examined for the Defendants :-
NIL List of documents exhibited for the Defendants :-
NIL Digitally signed
by
VEDAMOORTHY VEDAMOORTHY
BS BS
Date: 2025.12.04
17:58:48 +0530
(VEDAMOORTHY.B.S)
XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.