Bangalore District Court
Sri. Chandrashekar N vs The Chief Secretary on 1 August, 2022
KABC010108542022
IN THE COURT OF THE VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, (CCH No.19), BENGALURU.
Dated : This the 1 st day of August, 2022.
PRESENT: Smt. S.G.SUNITHA, B.Sc. , LLB.,
VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
O.S. No.2679/2022
Plaintiff : Sri. Chandrashekar N
S/o Narasimha Murthy,
Aged about 37 years,
R/at No.85/6, MH Shankarappa
Building, Muddinapalya Main Road,
Anjananagara, Vishwaneedam Post,
Bengaluru - 560 091.
(By Sri.D.V. Venkatesh., Advocate)
V/S
Defendant : 1. The Chief Secretary
Government of Karnataka
Vidhana Soudha,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. The Block Education Officer
Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumkur District.
3. The Secretary
Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board
Malleshwaram,
Bengaluru - 560 012.
2
O.S.No.2679/2022
4. The Head Master
Government High School
Dabbeghatta, Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumkur District.
5. The Head Master
Primary and Middle School,
Dodda Veeragondanahalli Village,
Kasaba Hobli, Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumkur District.
(D1 to 5 - Ex.Parte)
Date of institution of Suit 16-04-2022
Nature of the Suit Declaration
Date of commencement 04-07-2022
of recording of evidence
Date on which Judgment 01-08-2022
was pronounced
Total duration Years Months Days
00 04 15
JUDGMENT
This is a suit filed by the plaintiff against defendants seeking declaring that the correct name of the plaintiff is "CHANDRASHEKAR N" to be substituted in the SSLC Marks card of the plaintiff in place of "CHANDRASHEKHARA N" and grant such other reliefs to meet the ends of justice and equity.
2. In brief, the case of the plaintiff as stated in the Plaint as follows;
He has studied from 1st to 7th standard in the school of the 5th defendant and he has studied 8 to 10th standard and passed out SSLC from the school of the 4th defendant vide 3 O.S.No.2679/2022 Registration No.492901 in the month of March 2001 and the 3rd of defendant has issued the marks card to that effect. In his above said SSLC Marks card the name of the plaintiff has been wrongly mentioned as Chandrashekhara.N instead of Chandrashekar.N The said mistake was noticed by the plaintiff recently and hence he approached the defendants with request to correct his name in the SSLC Marks Card. But, the defendants have advised the plaintiff to obtain a judgment and decree from the court to the said effect. Hence, the plaintiff has issued Legal Notice to the Defendant on 8-2-2022 calling upon them to correct the name of the plaintiff in his SSLC Marks card. The notice sent to the defendants is duly served. After receipt of the legal notice, the defendants No. 1, 3 to 5 have not replied to the said notice nor complied the demands made in the said notice. The defendant No.2 has caused an untenable reply 3-3-2022. If the name of the plaintiff are corrected in the SSLC marks card of the plaintiff, no prejudice will be caused to the Defendants. On the other hand, if the Plaint is not allowed, the Plaintiff will be put to great hardship and injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money. Then it leads to multiplicity of proceedings. The cause of action to this suit arose on 8-2-2022 when the plaintiff issued the legal notice to the defendant and thereafter, when the defendant failed to correct the name of the plaintiff in his SSLC Marks Card, and within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
3. Inspite of service of summons the defendant No.1 to 5 remained absent and hence, they are placed ex-parte. Hence, case was posted for plaintiff's evidence.
4O.S.No.2679/2022
4. The plaintiff got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked as many as 10 documents as per Exs.P1 to P10 and closed his side.
5. Heard the arguments. I have carefully scrutinized the entire records before me.
6. Now the points that arise for my consideration are as under;
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief to declare the name of plaintiff is "CHANDRASHEKAR N" to substituted in the SSLC Marks card of the plaintiff in place of "CHANDRASHEKHARA N"
as prayed ?
2. What order or decree?
7. My findings on the above points are:
Point No.1 : In the Affirmative;
Point No.2 : As per final order,
for the following:
REASONS
8. POINT NO.1: Plaintiff, in order to prove his
case, stepped into the witness box and got examined as PW1 and he filed his Affidavit in lieu of oral evidence, wherein he reiterated the plaint averments and in order to corroborate his testimony, got produced, in support of his claim, got produced 10 documents marked as per Exs.P1 to P10. In this suit plaintiff has put forth Ex.P1 is the notarized copy of SSLC marks card, Ex.P2 is the notarized copy of 2nd PUC marks card, Ex.P3 is the notarized copy of statement of marks card of 1 st semester of B.Sc., Ex.P4 is the notarized copy of statement of marks card of 5 O.S.No.2679/2022 1st semester of B.Sc., Ex.P5 is the notarized copy of statement of marks card of 2nd semester of B.Sc., Ex.P6 is the notarized copy of statement of marks card of 3rd semester of B.Sc., Ex.P7 is the convocation certificate, Ex.P8 is the notarized copy of aadhar card, Ex.P9 is the legal notice with 5 postal receipts along with 3 acknowledgements with 2 track consignments and Ex.P10 is the reply by defendant No.2.
9. Upon consideration of above facts and documents it is seen that Ex.P2 notarized copy of 2nd PUC marks card, Ex.P3 notarized copy of statement of marks card of 1 st semester of B.Sc., Ex.P4 notarized copy of statement of marks card of 1st semester of B.Sc., Ex.P5 notarized copy of statement of marks card of 2nd semester of B.Sc., Ex.P6 notarized copy of statement of marks card of 3rd semester of B.Sc., Ex.P7 convocation certificate and Ex.P8 notarized copy of aadhar card showing name of plaintiff as chandrashekar N. Hence, no prejudice would be caused to the defendants if relief is granted as prayed by the plaintiff, on the other hand if relief not granted plaintiff would be prejudiced. Further the oral and documentary evidence of plaintiff have remained unchallenged and fully corroborating with each other. Hence, Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
10. POINT NO.3: In view of my findings on Point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The suit filed by the plaintiff is hereby decreed.6
O.S.No.2679/2022 Declared correct name of plaintiff is "CHANDRASHEKAR N"
Further defendants directed to correct name of the plaintiff as "CHANDRASHEKAR N" in his SSLC Marks card in place of "CHANDRASHEKHARA N" on collection of necessary fee if any.
No Order as to costs.
Draw Decree accordingly.
*** (Dictated to the Stenographer on Computer and print out taken thereof is revised, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in Open Court on this the 1 st day of August, 2022).
(S.G.SUNITHA) VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiff:
P.W.1 - Chandrashekar N Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff :
Ex.P.1 Notarized copy of SSLC marks card Ex.P.2 Notarized copy of 2nd PUC marks card Notarized copy of statement of marks of 1st semester Ex.P.3 of B.Sc Notarized copy of statement of marks of 1st semester Ex.P.4 of B.Sc Notarized copy of statement of marks of 2 nd semester Ex.P.5 of B.Sc 7 O.S.No.2679/2022 Notarized copy of statement of marks of 3 rd semester Ex.P.6 of B.Sc Ex.P.7 Convocation certificate Ex.P.8 Notarized copy of aadhar card Legal notice with 5 postal receipts along with 3 Ex.P.9 acknowledgements with 2 track consignments Ex.P.10 Reply by defendant No.2 Witness examined and Documents marked on behalf of Defendants:
-Nil-
(S.G.SUNITHA) VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.