Bangalore District Court
Sri Rajappa vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE
Form XXVII ADDL.CITY CIVIL JUDGE,
No.9 BANGALORE
(Civil)
Title sheet for Dated this the 5th day of September 2013
Judgment
in Suits PRESENT:
Shri Sudheer H. Koraddi B.Sc.,,LL.B.,(Spl)
XXVII Addl.City Civil Judge,
Bangalore.
O.S.No.8010/2012
Plaintiffs:- Sri Rajappa
Aged about 35 years,
W/o Sri Singri Gouda,
R/at E.W.S. No.221,
6th Main Road, 6th Cross,
Kengeri upanagar,
Bangalore.-560 060.
/Vs/
Defendants:- 1. State of Karnataka
Rep.by its Chief Secretary
Vidhana Soudha,
Vidhana Veedi Bangalore.
2. The Commissioner of Education
Government of Karnataka, new
Public Officer,
Nrupatunga Road,
Bangalore
2
CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_
3. The Secretary,
Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board,
Malleshwaram,
Bangalore-560 003.
Deputy Director
Public Education Department,
4. Mandya,
Mandya District.
Date of institution 09.11.2012
of the suit:
Nature of the suit Declaration and Injunction
Date of 30.07.2013
commencement
of recording of the
Evidence:
Date on which the 05.09.2013
judgment
Was pronounced:
Total Duration: Years Months Days
00 10 25
(S.H.Koraddi)
3
CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_
XXVII Addl.City Civil Judge,
Bangalore.
Bangalore.
JUDGMENT
This is the suit filed by the plaintiff against defendants 1 to 4 to declare that, his name is S.Raju and to direct the defendants to change his name as S.Raju in place of S.Rajappa.
2. In the plaint it is contended that, he has studied upto SSLC in Sri Yadushyla High School, Melukote, Mandya District and at the time of his admission his name is mentioned as S.Rajappa and his astrologer K.Muralidhar Bhat on 10.6.2012 has advised him to change the name, accordingly, he requested the defendants to change the name. They refused to do so and he has sworn an affidavit before notary on 29.6.2012 to that effect and also issued 4 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ paper publication in E-Sanje Kannada daily on 4.7.2012 and issued legal notice under Section 80 CPC on 23.7.2012, but defendant No.4 has issued an endorsement on 28.7.2012 to approach the competent court and therefore, he was constrained to file the suit and pray to decree the suit.
3. After registration of the suit, suit summons have been served upon the defendants and they have put appearance though District Government Pleader but failed to file written statement.
4. Plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 and the documents at Ex.P1 to P9 are marked.
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the records.
6. Now the points that arise for my consideration are as under:
1. Whether plaintiff proves that, he has intended to change his name as S.Raju in 5 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ place of S.Rajappa and he made his efforts to change the same in the defendants office?
2. What order or decree?
7. My answers to the above are as under:
Point No.1: In the affirmative Point No.2: As per final order for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1:-It is a case of the Plaintiff that, he intends to change his name as S.Raju in place of S.Rajappa and he has studied SSLC in Sri. Yadushyla High School, Melukote, Mandya District and his astrologer K.Muralidhar Bhat on 10.,6.2012 has advised him to change his name and accordingly he has sworn an affidavit on 29.6.2012 and issued paper publication in EE-Sanje on 4.7.2012 and requested defendants to change his name, but in vain and 6 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ thereafter, he has issued legal notice under Section 80 CPC on 23.7.2012 to the defendants and defendant No.4 has issued an endorsement on 28.7.2012 to approach competent court.
9. In support of this, he has adduced his oral evidence and produced Ex.P1 marks card, Ex.P2 astrologer letter, Ex.P3 affidavit., Ex.P4 paper publication, Ex.P5 endorsement of defendant; No.4, Ex.P6 legal notice, Ex.P7 postal receipts (4), Ex.P8 postal acknowledgements (4), Ex.P9 endorsement dated 28.7.2012 . These documents show that, name of plaintiff is entered as S.Rajappa in the school records and his astrologer has advised him to change his name as S.Raju and thereafter sworn to an affidavit and issued paper publication and requested the defendants to effect the change. But the defendants refused to do so and intimated him that it could not be done under law. Thereafter, he has issued legal notice on 23.7.2013 and it is served upon the defendants. But the 7 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ defendants have refused to change his name and not responded the notice.
10. It is needless to say that, one can change his name for his satisfaction and with due process of law and such suit is maintainable in law. The evidence of plaintiff is supported by the documents and plaintiff has complied the provisions of law by swearing the affidavit, making the paper publication, issuing statutory notice etc. The advise of the astrologer is also a point to be considered in this regard and the plaintiff, who intends to change his name on its basis cannot be refused to do so. Therefore, I don't find any impediment in decreeing the suit of the plaintiff and accordingly, I answer this point in the affirmative.
11. Point NO.2: From the discussions made in the above point, it is very much clear that suit of the plaintiff is fit to be decreed. In the result I pass the following:
ORDER 8 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ The suit of the Plaintiff is decreed and his name is declared as S.Raju. Defendants are directed to change his name as S.Raju in place of S.Rajappa after collecting necessary late fees etc., under the rules.
No order as to costs.
(Dictated to the typist, typed by her corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court this the 5th day of September 2013) [S.H.Koraddi], XXVII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE List of the witnesses examined for the plaintiff. P.W.1: S.Rajappa List of the documents marked for the plaintiff.
Ex.P1- Marks card Ex.P2, Astrologer letter Ex.P3- Paper publication . Ex.P5- Endorsement of Education Department Ex.P6- Office copy of legal notice Ex.P7- 4 Postal receipts Ex.P8- Postal acknowledgement. Ex.P9- Endorsement. 9
CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ List of the witnesses examined for the defendant.
Nil List of the documents marked for the defendant.
Nil.
[Sudheer H. Koraddi], XXVII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore.
10 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_ Judgment pronounced in open court (vide separate judgment), with the following operative portion.
The suit of the Plaintiff is decreed and his name is declared as S.Raju. Defendants are directed to change his name as S.Raju in place of S.Rajappa after collecting necessary late fees etc., under the rules.
No order as to costs.
XXVII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bangalore.
11 CT0028_O.S._8010_2012_Judgment_