Bangalore District Court
Anbarasi M vs The Chief Secretary Govt Of Karnataka on 8 December, 2025
KABC010105752025
IN THE COURT OF XXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BENGALURU
Dated this the 8th 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.2987/2025
PLAINTIFFS : 1. Mrs.M.Anbarasi,
W/o Late B.Vijayashekar,
Aged about 45 years,
R/at No.247, 6th Cross,
BDA Layout, Lingarajapuram,
St.Thomas Town Post,
Bengaluru - 560 084.
2. V.Preethika Shree,
D/o Late Vijayashekar,
Aged about 17 years,
Since Minor rep by 1st plaintiff
Mother and Natural Guardian
M.Anbarasi,
R/at No.247, 6th Cross,
BDA Layout, Lingarajapuram,
St.Thomas Town Post,
Bengaluru - 560 084.
(By Sri.Pattu M.Gopal, Advocate)
V/s
2
O.S.No.2987/2025
DEFENDANTS : 1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Karnataka,
Department of Higher Education,
Vidhanasoudha,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
2. The Secretary,
Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board,
6th Cross Road, Malleshwaram,
Bengaluru - 560 003.
3. Block Education Officer,
BEO-Zone-2, No.250,
K.Kamaraj Road,
Sivanachetty Gardens,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
4. The Principal,
St. Charles High School,
Lingarajapuram,
Bengaluru - 560 084.
5. The Deputy Director of Public Instruction,
Department of Public Instruction,
K.G.Road, Bengaluru North Range-3,
Bengaluru - 560 009.
(By Smt.Bharati Patil, the learned
District Government Pleader for
defendants No.1 to 3 and 5 and the 4 th
defendant - exparte )
Date of institution of the suit. 22.04.2025
Declaration and
Nature of the suit
Mandatory Injunction
Date of the commencement of 03.11.2025
recording evidence
3
O.S.No.2987/2025
Date on which the Judgment 08.12.2025
was pronounced
Years Months Days
Total duration
00 07 16
(VEDAMOORTHY B.S.)
XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru.
JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs have filed this suit against the defendants for declaration to declare that the name of the 2nd plaintiff is "V.Preethika Shree" instead of "P.Preehika Shree", the name of her father is "Vijayashekar" instead of "Philip Stephen" and Mandatory Injunction to rectify the same in her SSLC Marks Card and Transfer Certificate.
2. The brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are that the 2nd plaintiff was born on 17.04.2008. The 1 st plaintiff is the mother and Sri.Vijayashekar is the father of the 2 nd plaintiff. Her birth was registered before the Chief Registrar of Births and Deaths, BBMP, Bengaluru vide register No.1388 dated 20.04.2008. In the year 2024, the 2 nd 4 O.S.No.2987/2025 plaintiff completed her SSLC at the 4 th defendant school. In the SSLC Marks Card issued by the 2 nd defendant and in the School Transfer Certificate issued by the 4 th defendant, the name of the 2nd plaintiff is wrongly mentioned as "P.Preethika Shree" instead of "V.Preethika Shree" and the name of the father of the 2nd plaintiff is wrongly mentioned as "Philip Stephen" instead of "Vijayashekar". The 1 st plaintiff could not recognize the said mistake. To avoid the future complication, confusion, controversy and dispute, the 1st plaintiff insisted the concerned authorities for correction of the names of the 2 nd plaintiff and her father. On 04.02.2025, 1st plaintiff sent a Legal Notice to the defendants calling upon them to rectify the mistake. The said Legal Notices were received by the defendants. But, they have not rectified the said mistake. Therefore, the plaintiffs have filed this suit.
3. After due service of summons to the defendants. Defendants No.1 to 3 and 5 have appeared before this Court. Among them, the 3rd defendant has filed written statement. Defendants No.1, 2 and 5 have filed Memo 5 O.S.No.2987/2025 stating that they have adopting the written statement of the 3rd defendant as their written statement. The 4 th defendant has not appeared before this Court. Hence, he is placed exparte.
4. In the written statement filed by the 3 rd defendant, the 3rd defendant contended that the suit is not maintainable. The plaintiffs have approached this Court not with clean hands. The plaint averments are denied as false. As per the circular issued by the Commissioner of the Educational Department, there is no provision to change the name of the plaintiff or her mother. The suit is barred by limitation. Hence, prayed to dismiss the suit.
5. Based on the pleadings of the parties to the following issues are framed :-
1. Whether the plaintiff proves that the name of her daughter is V.Preethika Shree and the name of her father is Vijayashankar ?
2. Whether the plaintiff proves that in the school records of her daughter, the name of the daughter is wrongly entered as P.Preethika Shree and the name of her father is wrongly 6 O.S.No.2987/2025 mentioned as Philip Stephen ?
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 1st plaintiff as PW1 and the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P16. The defendants have not produced any evidences either oral or documentary.
7. Heard the arguments of the learned Counsels for the plaintiffs and defendants No.1 to 3, and 5. 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 Affirmative,
Issue No.3 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.4 : As per final order for the following;
REASONS
9. ISSUES No.1 TO 3 :- The findings on these Issues are inter-related. Therefore, they are taken together for 7 O.S.No.2987/2025 consideration.
To prove these issues, the 1 st plaintiff has produced her oral evidences as PW1. She has filed her affidavit by way of examination-in-chief. In the said affidavit, she has reiterated the facts stated in the plaint. In support of the above oral evidences, she has also produced the documentary evidences Ex.P1 to Ex.P16. Among them, Ex.P1 is the Birth Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff, Ex.P2 is the office copy of the Legal Notice issued by the 1st plaintiff to defendants No.1 to 4, Ex.P3 is the Postal Receipts, Ex.P4 and Ex.P5 are the Postal Acknowledgments, Ex.P6 is the Reply given to the 4 th defendant, Ex.P7 to Ex.P10 are the Track Consignments, Ex.P11 is the Aadhar Card of the 1 st plaintiff, Ex.P12 is the Aadhar Card of the 2nd plaintiff, Ex.P13 is the Death Certificate of B.Vijayashekar, Ex.P14 is the SSLC Marks Card of the 2nd plaintiff, Ex.P15 is the Letter issued by the 4 th defendant school and Ex.P16 is the copy of the School Transfer Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff.
10. PW1 is cross-examined on behalf of defendants No.1 to 3 and 5. It is undisputed fact that in the SSLC Marks Card 8 O.S.No.2987/2025 and the School Transfer Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff, her name is mentioned as "P.Preethika Shree" and the name of the father of the plaintiff is mentioned as "Philip Stephen". It further appears that in Ex.P1 i.e., the Birth Certificate of the 2nd plaintiff issued BBMP, the name of the father of the 2 nd plaintiff is mentioned as "Vijayashekar". It further appears that in the Aadhar Cards of the plaintiffs, the name of the husband of the 1st plaintiff and the father of the 2 nd plaintiff are mentioned as "Vijayashekar". In the Death Certificate of the husband of the 1st plaintiff and the father of the 2 nd plaintiff, his name is mentioned as "Vijayasekar". It appears from the above evidences produced by the plaintiffs that the correct name of the 2nd plaintiff is "V.Preethika Shree" and the name of her father is "Vijayashekar" and in her school records like SSLC Marks Card and Transfer Certificate, her name is wrongly mentioned as "P.Preethika Shree" and the name of her father is mentioned as "Philip Stephen". Therefore, the plaintiffs have proved issues No.1 and 2. It further appears that the defendants have not corrected the aforesaid mistakes in spite of the issuance of Legal Notice. 9
O.S.No.2987/2025 Therefore, the plaintiffs are entitled for the reliefs as prayed. Hence, I answer Issues No.1 to 3 in the Affirmative.
11. ISSUE No.4 :- In view of the findings on Issues No.1 to 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 2nd plaintiff is "V.Preethika Shree"
and the name of her father is
"Vijayashekar".
The defendants are hereby directed by way of mandatory injunction to mention the correct name of the 2 nd plaintiff as 'V.Preethika Shree' instead of "P.Preethika Shree' and the name of the plaintiff as "Vijayashekar" instead of "Philip Stephen" in all the school records maintained by them and issue corrected or fresh SSLC Marks Card and School Transfer Certificate to the 2nd plaintiff. 10
O.S.No.2987/2025 Since there is no mistake on the part of the defendants in mentioning the name of the 2nd plaintiff and her father, the plaintiffs shall bear the costs of the suit.
Draw the decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer, typed by her, printout taken, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court today on this the 8th day of December 2025).
(VEDAMOORTHY.B.S) XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Plaintiffs :-
PW1 : M.Anbarasi.
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 : Reply,
Ex.P7 to 10 : Track Consignments,
Ex.P11 & 12 : Aadhar Cards,
Ex.P13 : Death Certificate,
11
O.S.No.2987/2025
Ex.P14 : SSLC Marks Card,
Ex.P15 : Letter,
Ex.P16 : School Transfer Certificate.
List of witnesses examined for the Defendants :-
NIL List of documents exhibited for the Defendants :- Digitally signed
NIL by
VEDAMOORTHY VEDAMOORTHY
BS BS
Date: 2025.12.08
18:02:26 +0530
(VEDAMOORTHY.B.S)
XXXI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.