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 2, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Sri. Srinvas.R vs Chief Secretary on 10 April, 2023

KABC010191682022
                             TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGEMENTS IN SUITS

                             IN THE COURT OF V ADDL.CITY CIVIL COURT
                                        AT BENGALURU
                                          (CCH.No.13)



                             Present: Sri. ONKARAPPA.R, B.Sc., LL.B.
                                         V ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
                                         BENGALURU

                               Dated this the 10th day of April, 2023

                                        O.S.4553/2022

              PLAINTIFF:-         : Sri. Srinvas.R
                                    S/o Rajanna.N.
                                    Aged about 19 years,
                                    R/at No.27, 7th Cross,
                                    Manjunatha Nagar,
                                    Sri. Rama Temple Road,
                                    Bengaluru North,
                                    Nagasandra Post,
                                    Bengaluru-73.


                                    (By Sri. VGM, Advocate)

                                  -Versus-

              DEFENDANTS:-        : 1. Chief Secretary,
                                    Government of Karnataka,
                                    Dr. Ambedkar Veedi,
                                    Vidhana Soudha,
                                    Bengaluru-01.

                                  2. The Head Mistress,
                                  Acharya Gurukula Vidyakendra
                                  English High School, 10th cross,
                                  Bagalagunte, Hesaraghatta Main
                                  Road, Bengaluru.

                                  3. The Principal,
                                  Acharya Gurukula Vidyakendra
                                  English High School, 10th cross,
                                  Bagalagunte, Hesaraghatta Main
                                  Road, Bengaluru.
                                     2
                                                         O.S. No.4553/2022


                                    4. Block Education Officer,
                                    Bengaluru North,
                                    Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
                                    5. Karnataka Secondary Education
                                    Examination Board, Rep. By its
                                    Secretary, 6th Cross,
                                    Malleshwaram, Bengaluru-03.
                                    6. The Principal,
                                    RR Institutions,
                                    Hesaraghatta Main Road,
                                    Chikkanavara, Bengaluru-90.

                                        (D.1, 4, 5 - III ADGP
                                        D.3 - In person,
                                        D.2, 6- Ex-parte)

  Date of institution of the Suit             :   14/07/2022
                                                  Declaration      &    Mandatory
  Nature of the Suit                          :
                                                  Injunction
  Date of commencement of recording of            21/03/2023
                                              :
  evidence
  Date on which the Judgment was                  10/04/2023
                                              :
  pronounced
  Total Duration                                   Year         Months       Days
                                              :
                                                    00             08         2



                                                                 [ ONKARAPPA.R ]
                                                    V ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE
                                                              BENGALURU

                         -: J U D G M E N T :-

      Suit has filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for the
relief of declaration of her name. Further consequential relief of
mandatory injunction sought an direction to the defendants                    to
change the name of the plaintiff in all his records and testimonials
as Devik.R instead of "Srinivas.R".
                                  3
                                                O.S. No.4553/2022


       2.     Brief facts are as under:-

      That,     the plaintiff viz., Srinivas.R, aged about 18 years
S/o Rajanna.N and Smt. Manjula.B.M was admitted to defendant
No.2 school and completed his SSLC during 2018-19 and
thereafter he got admitted to 6th defendant institution for higher
education and in all his educational record the name of the
plaintiff is entered as Srinivas.R. Since the plaintiff was/is not
having good health and as such there was no progress in the his
education recently the plaintiff along with his parents approached
the numerologist and the numerologist on examining and seeing
his personal details including the date of birth and born time, he
advised the plaintiff and his parents to change his name as
Devik.R instead of Srinivas.R in all the plaintiff's future purpose
including in his educational records so that the plaintiff will come
out of all the mental and physical problems and as such his future
will be birth and happiness.     As such the plaintiff decided to
change his name as Devik.R. and issued paper publication in
Prajavani and Deccan Herald on 28/08/2021 which was duly
sworn by his mother before the concerned notary public and now
his name is called as Devik.R only in the family as well as in his
known places. However, his name was continuing as Srinivas.R
in his records as such the plaintiff intends to change his name as
above in the place of his old name in all records and requested
defendant No.5 and 4 to change his name as above, but the they
failed to reply the same. As such he caused legal notice dated
21/12/2021 and 20/04/2022 through RPAD calling upon the
                                    4
                                                   O.S. No.4553/2022


defendants t change his name from Srinivas.R to Devik.R, but the
defendants failed to comply the same. Cause of action for the
suit arose on 21/12/2021 and 20/04/2022 the date of issuance of
the legal notice. On these grounds prayed for decreeing the suit.

      3.   Records reveal that, though defendant No.3 appeared
in person before the court but not chosen to filed their written
statement. Despite service of suit summons the defendant No.2
and 6 remained absent at before the court. Hence, they placed
ex-parte as per order sheet dated 05/04/2023.           The defendant
No.1, 4 and 5 appeared through learned III ADGP and filed their
written statement, wherein they contended that, suit of the plaintiff
is not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case. The
defendants denies having received any notice under Sec.80(2) of
C.P.C. The suit is not maintainable for non compliance of
Sec.80(2) of C.P.C.         The     allegations made against the
defendants authority are all false and denied, the plaintiffs be put
to strict proof of the same. As per the circular issued by the
Commissioner of the Education Department, there is no provision
to change the name of the student in school records. The suit is
barred by limitation as the suit is filed by the plaintiff after a lapse
of considerable time. The averments made in para No.3 to 6 are
all false and denied by the defendants. There is no case of action
for the suit and alleged cause of action is imaginary. On these
grounds prayed for dismissal of the suit with costs.
                                   5
                                                 O.S. No.4553/2022


      4.   On the basis of the above narrated pleadings this has
framed the issues as follow:

      1) Whether the plaintiff prove that
           his     correct name       is 'Devik.R'
           and not as 'Srinivas.R' ?
      2) Whether the plaintiff is        entitled
           for the relief of declaration and
           mandatory injunction as sought
           for ?
      3) Whether the plaintiff is        entitled
           for suit reliefs as sought for ?
      4) What order or decree?
     5. In order to prove his case the plaintiff examined himself
as PW-1 and got marked the documents at Ex.P.1 to P.11. No
oral or documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the
defendants.

      6. Heard and perused the material on record.

      7. My findings on the above issues are as under:-

              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
                           for the following:
                                   6
                                                  O.S. No.4553/2022


                        -: R E A S O N S :-

      8.     Issue Nos.1 to 3:- The Issues No.1 to 3 are
overlapping with the each. Hence, Issue No.1 to 3 that I taken for
my common discussion to avoid repetition of the facts.

      9. The plaintiff in order to prove his case he himself chosen
to examined as PW1. In lieu of examination in chief P.W.1 filed an
affidavit. Wherein the affidavit PW1 reiterated the all averments of
the plaint. It is the particular case of the plaintiff that, he is S/o
Rajanna.N and Smt. Manjula.B.M was admitted to defendant
No.2 school and completed his SSLC during 2018-19 and
thereafter he got admitted to 6th defendant institution for higher
education and in all his educational record the name of the
plaintiff is entered as Srinivas.R. Since the plaintiff was/is not
having good health and as such there was no progress in the his
education recently the plaintiff along with his parents approached
the numerologist and the numerologist on examining and seeing
his personal details including the date of birth and born time, he
advised the plaintiff and his parents to change his name as
Devik.R instead of Srinivas.R in all the plaintiff's future purpose
including in his educational records so that the plaintiff will come
out of all the mental and physical problems and as such his future
will be birth and happiness.      As such the plaintiff decided to
change his name as Devik.R. and issued paper publication in
Prajavani and Deccan Herald on 28/08/2021 which was duly
sworn by his mother before the concerned notary public and now
                                   7
                                                 O.S. No.4553/2022


his name is called as Devik.R only in the family as well as in his
known places. However, his name was continuing as Srinivas.R
in his records as such the plaintiff intends to change his name as
above in the place of his old name in all records.

      10.     The plaintiff to substantiate his case he also got
marked as many as 11 documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.11. Ex.P.1
notice issued under Section 80 of C.P.C. against all defendants.
Ex.P.2 postal receipt. Ex.P.3 postal acknowledgment. Ex.P.2 and
P.3 postal receipt and acknowledgment herein evidence the
plaintiff complied Section 80 of C.P.C. by issuing two months prior
notice as per Ex.P.1. Ex.P.4 legal notice. Ex.P.5 endorsement
issued by BEO, Bengaluru North Taluk. Ex.P.6 horoscope. Ex.P.7
affidavit. As per Ex.P.7 the plaintiff with an intention to change his
name from Srinivas.R to Devik.R he sworn the affidavit at before
the notary.   Ex.P.8 Kannada daily news paper viz., Prajavani.
Ex.P.9 English daily news paper viz., The Deccan Herald. On
going through Ex.P.8 and P.9 papers very relevant portion
available on Ex.P.8 and P.9 news papers hereby disclosed with
intention to change name of the plaintiff from Srinivas.R to
Devik.R he published the same in Ex.P.8 and P.9 daily news
paper. Ex.P.10 SSLC marks card pertains to the plaintiff. Ex.P.11
Diploma marks cards pertains to the plaintiff. On going through
Ex.P.10 and P.11 documents the same Ex.P.10 and P.11
documents that herein disclosed name of the plaintiff mentioned
as Srinivas.R. The same Ex.P.10 and P.11 documents have also
herein disclosed the plaintiff studied at before the defendants
                                     8
                                                     O.S. No.4553/2022


institutions. It is of net case of the plaintiff herein that the plaintiff
is not having good health and as such no progress in the
plaintiff's education. Further also case of the plaintiff that, he was
having some health issues. Therefore the plaintiff and his parents
approached their numerologist for the astrological remedy. Upon
such approach of the plaintiff, the numerologist of the plaintiff
advised the plaintiff to change his name as Devik.R. The very
crux of the plaintiff's case that herein remains as unchallenged,
since neither of the defendant chosen to cross examined PW1
despite the defendant have the specific written statement in
against plaintiff's case. As such the contention of the plaintiff that
the plaintiff now he is facing health issues, that he approached
the   numerologist     for   the   astrological   remedy      and        the
numerologist advised the plaintiff to change his name as per his
date of birth and time of the plaintiff that herein stands as intact.

       11.     It is not in dispute that the plaintiff is not a
government servant. Though the plaintiff has produced Kundali
issued by the Astrologer, the anxiety and hastiness of the plaintiff
to make change his name is here evident that the plaintiff
required to change of his name from Srinivas.R to Devik.R.
Further, the law settled by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka with
respect to faith and honour upon Astrological advise to the parties in an
judgment observed in RFA No.322/2013 dated 10/12/2013 (Gunda
Naika.P.S Vs. The State of Karnataka) that there is no impediment
to pass the decree in favour of the plaintiff stating that,              the
efficacy of the astrological advice cannot be tested in the courts of law.
                                  9
                                                O.S. No.4553/2022


      12.   So, in the circumstances of the case, the name of the
plaintiff has to be rectified    by the defendants in his           all
records/testimonials   as Devik.R instead of Srinivas.R. This
view has also been supported by the judgment of our Hon'ble
High Court passed in RFA No.284/2014 (DEC) dated 02/09/2016.
Therefore, having regard to facts and circumstances of the cases,
I am of the opinion that the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of
declaration and mandatory Injunction as observed supra.
Hence, I answer Issue No.1 to 3 are in the affirmative.

      13.   Issue No.4 :- For the foregoing reasons, I proceed to

pass the following;


                            ORDER
                       The    suit  of    the
                plaintiff hereby decreed.

                       That           hereby

declared the name of the plaintiff Devik.R instead of Srinivas.R. Further hereby directed to all the defendants to change the name of the plaintiff as Devik.R in the place of Srinivas.R in all his records and testimonials accordingly.

10

O.S. No.4553/2022 There shall be no order as to costs.

Draw decree accordingly.

(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and signed by me and pronounced in the open Court this the 10th day of April, 2023) [ ONKARAPPA.R ] V ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff :

PW.1 Srinivas.R List of witnesses examined on behalf of Defendants:

- Nil -
List of documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:
Ex. P1                     Legal notice
Ex. P2                     Postal receipt
Ex. P3                     Postal acknowledgement
Ex. P4                     Legal notice issued to 1st defendant
Ex. P5                     Endorsement
Ex. P6                     Horoscope
Ex. P7                     Affidavit
Exs. P8                    Prajavani News Paper
Ex. P8(a)                  Relevant portion
Ex. P9                     Deccan Harald News Paper
Ex. P9(a)                  Relevant portion
Ex. P10                    SSLC marks card
Ex. P11                    Three diploma marks cards.
List of documents marked on behalf of Defendants:
- Nil -
[ ONKARAPPA.R ] V ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU 11 O.S. No.4553/2022 Operative portion of the judgment pronounced in open court vide separate judgment:-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff hereby decreed.
That hereby declared the name of the plaintiff Devik.R instead of Srinivas.R. 12 O.S. No.4553/2022 Further hereby directed to all the defendants to change the name of the plaintiff as Devik.R in the place of Srinivas.R in all his records and testimonials accordingly.
There shall be no order as to costs. Draw decree accordingly.
[ ONKARAPPA.R ] V ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU 13 O.S. No.4553/2022 14 O.S. No.4553/2022