Bangalore District Court
Yogesh C vs The Chief Secretary on 1 July, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE XXXI ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-14)
PRESENT:
Sri. G.S.REVANKAR, B.Com., LL.B. (Spl.),
XXXI ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU CITY.
DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF JULY 2016
O.S.No.1081/2015
Plaintiff/s: Yogesh C,
S/o. Chikka Kariyanna,
No.16, 9th Main, 8th Cross,
Shivanagar, Rajajinagar,
Bengaluru-560 010.
(By Sri.Kumar, Adv.)
/VS/
Defendant/s: 1. The Chief Secretary,
Government of Karnataka,
Ambedkar Veedhi, Vidhana Soudha,
Bengaluru.
2. The Commissioner for Public Instruction
In Karnataka, New Public Office,
K.R.Circle, Bengaluru.
3. The Director,
SSLC Board, 5th Cross,
Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
4. The Head Master/Principal,
Government Junior College,
Shivanahally, Rajajinagar,
Bengaluru North, Bengaluru-560 010.
2 O.S.No.1081/2015
5. The Director,
Department of Pre-University Education,
18th Cross, Malleshwaram, Bengaluru.
6. The Principal,
Smt.Late Gangamma and M.Thimmaiah,
Government Pre.University College,
Shivanagara, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru-10.
(Exparte)
Date of Institution of the suit : 02.02.2015.
Nature of suit : Declaration & Injunction.
Date of commencement of :
recording of evidence. 10.06.2016.
Date on which Judgment was : 01.07.2016.
pronounced.
Total Duration. : Days Months Year
29 04 01
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed this suit for declaration that, his name as mentioned in the SSLC Marks Card as "Yogeesha C" is due to bonafide mistake and his name is "Yogesh C" and to direct the defendants to effect the change of his name accordingly. 3 O.S.No.1081/2015
2. The facts of the case of the plaintiff are as follows:-
The plaintiff has contended that, he is the son of Chikka Kariyanna and born on 08.02.1983. Further he has contended that, his name in his SSLC and PUC marks cards is mentioned as 'Yogeesha C' instead of "Yogesh C". Further it is contended that, by inadvertence, his name has been wrongly mentioned and it might be the typographical mistake and the same is a bonafide mistake. The plaintiff further contended that, recently himself and his parents have verified and realized that, there is a typographical mistake in the marks card. On these grounds, the plaintiff has filed this suit.
3. In response to the suit summons, the defendants have remained absent and as such, they are placed exparte.
4. The plaintiff himself is examined as P.W.1 and got marked 13 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.13.
5. Heard the arguments.
6. Now, the points that arise for my consideration are as follows;
1) Whether the plaintiff has made out grounds for rectification of his name in the SSLC Marks Card as prayed for ?
2) What order or decree ?
4 O.S.No.1081/2015
7. My findings on the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1: In the affirmative,
Point No.2: As per the final order
for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1: The plaintiff has filed this suit for the declaration that, his name in the SSLC marks card is shown as 'Yogeesha C' instead of "Yogesh C" and to direct the defendants to rectify his name accordingly.
9. The plaintiff has contended that, in the SSLC and PUC Marks cards, his name is shown as 'Yogeesha C' instead of "Yogesh C" and the same is due to inadvertence and it might be the typographical mistake and the same is a bonafide mistake. The plaintiff himself is examined as P.W.1 and during his evidence, in all 13 documents are marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.13. Ex.P.3 is the SSLC Marks Card and Ex.P.4 is the PUC Marks Card. In the said Marks Cards, the name of the plaintiff is shown as 'Yogeesha C'. P.W.1 in his chief- examination has reiterated the plaint averments. He has specifically 5 O.S.No.1081/2015 contended that, his name in the SSLC and PUC Marks Cards has been wrongly mentioned and the same is due to the typographical mistake. The plaintiff has produced the Voter ID Card, which is marked as Ex.P.1 and PAN Card is marked as Ex.P.2. These documents go to show that, the plaintiff's name is "Yogesh C". So, it appears that, due to the bonafide mistake, the name of the plaintiff has been wrongly mentioned as 'Yogeesha C'. Hence, I answer point No.1 in the 'affirmative'.
10. Point No.2: In view of the reasons stated above, I proceed to pass the following, ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed. No cost. It is hereby declared that, the plaintiff's name is "Yogesh C" and the concerned defendants are directed to rectify the name of the plaintiff in the concerned records accordingly. 6 O.S.No.1081/2015
Draw the decree in the above terms.
*** (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 1st Day of July, 2016) (G.S.REVANKAR) XXXI ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for plaintiff/s:
PW.1 : Yogesh C. List of documents exhibited for plaintiff/s:
Ex.P.1 : Election ID. Ex.P.2 : PAN Card. Ex.P.3 : SSLC Marks Card. Ex.P.4 : PUC Marks Card. Ex.P.5 & P.6 : Legal notices. Ex.P.7 : Reply. Ex.P.8 : Another reply. Ex.P.9 to P.13 : Postal acknowledgements.
List of witnesses examined and documents exhibited for defendant/s:
Exparte.
(G.S.REVANKAR) XXXI ACC & SJ, BENGALURU.