Bangalore District Court
Noticed The Mistake Made By Him In ... vs Have Entered Appearance Through Their ... on 10 March, 2023
1
O.S.No. 8864/2019
KABC010370752019
C.R.P.67
Govt. of Karnataka
Form No.9 (Civil)
Title Sheet for
Judgments in Suits
(R.P.91)
TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENTS IN SUITS
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE
(C.C.H. No.17)
DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF MARCH 2023
PRESENT:- Smt. Sheila B.M., M.Com., LL.M,
II Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru
O.S.No. 8864 /2019
[Plaintiff: Master. B.G. Haran,
Aged 18 years,
S/o B.G Girish,
R/at No.8, M.M.Lane, 5th Cross,
Behind Lalitha Clinic,
Akkipet Main Road,
Bangalore-560053
(By Sri Manjunath G Kandekar,
Advocate)
Vs.
Defendants:- 1) Ministry of Human Resources
Development,
Shastri Bhawan,
Dr.Rajendra Prasad Road,
2
O.S.No. 8864/2019
New Delhi-110001
Represented by its Secreatary.
2) Council for the Indian School
Certificate Examinations,
Pragati House, 3rd Floor,
47-48 Nehru Place,
New Delhi-110019
Represented by it's the Chief
Executive and Secretary.
3) The Principal,
Venus International Public School,
No.19-A, 19/2-1, Kodi Basavanna
Temple Street,
6th Block, Rajajinagara,
Bangalore-560010.
4) The Principal,
Venkat International Public School,
66th Cross Road, 5th Block,
Rajajinagar,
Bengaluru-560010.
5) The Registrar of Births and
Deaths,
BBMP, N.R.Square,
Hudson Circle,
Bangalore-560001.
6) The Registrar of Births and
Deaths,
BBMP Shopping Complex,
Tank Bund Road, Gandhi Nagar,
Behind Upparpet Police Station,
Bangalore-560009.
(D.1 - Sri. S.H. Advocate)
(D-3 & 4 - Sri. P.K. Advocate)
(D-5 & 6 - K.N.S. Advocate)
3
O.S.No. 8864/2019
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Institution of the suit : 06.12.2019
Nature of the suit (suit on : Declaration for change of
name
pronote, suit for declaration
and possession, suit for
injunction etc,)
Date of the commencement : 09.01.2023
of recording of the evidence
Date on which the Judgment : 10.03.2023
was pronounced
Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total duration : 03 03 04
----------------------------------------------------------------------
(Sheila B.M.)
II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
& Special Judge, Bangalore.
JUDGMENT
The plaintiff has filed this suit for declaration to declare that the plaintiff's correct name is B.G. Digvijay instead of B.G. Haran and also to direct the defendants 2 to 5 to change and enter correct name of plaintiff as B.G. Digvijay instead of B.G. Haran in all his records.
.2. The brief facts of the case is that the plaintiff being minor is represented by his father to institute and proceed in the above matter. The minor plaintiff presently pursuing his 4 O.S.No. 8864/2019 studies in Venkat International Public School. The correct and true name of plaintiff is B.G. Digvijay, however while entering the name in his birth certificate in the office of the respondent No. 5 and 6 authority instead of B.G. Digvijay his name came to be entered as B.G. Haran. It is stated that grandfather of plaintiff noticed the mistake made by him in entering the name of the plaintiff recently and after approach and discussion with priest of the temple it is advised by the priest of the temple that for the bright future as well as upliftment and welfare of the plaintiff and on the basis of numerology they decided to change the same in all relevant papers by substituting the correct name in place of wrong name given in the school records and all other records pertains to plaintiff. It is stated that after coming to know of the mistake, the plaintiff got issued notice to defendants requesting to substitute correct name of plaintiff, despite receipt of the notice by all the defendants, they neither taken any action to substitute the name nor gave any reply. Hence, the plaintiff constrained to file the suit and prayed for decree. 5
O.S.No. 8864/2019 .3. In pursuance of service of suit summons, the defendants have entered appearance through their counsels. The defendants 5 and 6 have filed written statement.
.4. The defendants 5 and 6 have filed written statement stating that it is to be noted that the plaintiff has stated priest of the temple but not mentioned as to which temple or which priest. The averments of the plaint has to specific. It is also submitted that the grand father of the minor plaintiff himself has given the name which is entered in the birth certificate at the time of registration / entering. It is stated that the plaintiff guardian who intends to get the correction of name in birth certificate of his son, has not made the state as party. Even the office of the Joint Director of Statistics is also not made a party. Further more, the plaintiff has not made the hospital authority where the child is born as the first entry is made there. Hence, the suit is to be dismissed for non-joinder of proper and necessary parties.
.5. It is stated that names and address given by the plaintiff or their relatives at the time of birth or at the time of furnishing of details, the same shall be entered in the records 6 O.S.No. 8864/2019 issued. As such, there is no mistake on the part of the authority in issuing the birth certificate.
.6. Under registration of Birth and Death Act, Section 15 of the Act provides for correction and cancellation of the entries made in the register of births and deaths. As per Section only clerical or formal error made can be corrected by following certain procedures. As such, a major correction is not possible. Hence, the entire name cannot be changed.
.7. It is stated that the plaintiff has to give statutory notice under Section 482 of the KMC Act before filing of the suit as required under the KMC Act, which is mandatory and has to wait for the specified time, later file the suit and as such, the suit is to be dismissed. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the suit.
.8. On the basis of the above pleadings of both parties, the following issues have been framed by this Court:
1) Whether the plaintiff proves that his correct name is B.G Digvijay and not B.G Haran?
2) Whether the plaintiff is entitle for declaration as prayed for?
3) What order or decree?
7
O.S.No. 8864/2019
.9. To prove the said issues, father of the plaintiff is examined himself as PW.1. Documents got marked Ex.P.1 to
16. The defendants have not adduced oral evidence and got marked the documents.
.10. Heard the arguments.
.11. My answers to the above issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : In the affirmative,
Issue No.2 : In the affirmative,
Issue No.3 : As per final order,
for the following:
R E A S ON S
.12. Issue No.1: The natural father of the plaintiff has been examined as PW.1. He has reiterated the plaint averments. He has stated that his son presently pursuing his studies in BMS College of Commerce and Management. He has stated that at the time of filing of the above suit, his son was studying in Venkat International Public School. The correct and true name of his son is B.G. Digvijay, however, while entering his name in his birth certificate in the office of the respondent No. 5 and 6 authority instead of B.G. Digvijay, his son name came to be entered as B.G. Haran. There was a mistake while entering his son name in the birth certificate 8 O.S.No. 8864/2019 and the same came to be continued. He has stated that during April 2019 there was a pooja in his house and after completion of pooja and other performances, while discussing with elders in the family, it was disclosed that B.G. Haran was only a nick name which was called by the grand parents of the plaintiff. He has stated that after furnishing information and details about his son to the priest, it is learnt by him that his son should have been called as B.G. Digvijay. He has stated that grand father of the plaintiff casually given the name of his son as B.G. Haran as it is nick name and failed to give correct name as B.G. Digvijay. They came to know about a mistake recently.
.13. PW.1 has stated that for the bright future and welfare of his son and on the basis of numerology they decided to change the name in the place of wrong name given in the school records and all other records pertains to his son. Ex.P.1 is the invitation cover wherein name of plaintiff is mentioned as B.G. Digvijay. Ex.P.2 is the Aadhar card. Ex.P.3 is the birth certificate. Ex.P.4 is the certificate of migration issued by the Chief Executive and Secretary of Council for the Indian School certificate examination, New 9 O.S.No. 8864/2019 Delhi. Ex.P.5 is the marks card of the plaintiff. Ex.P.6 and 7 are the study certificates. In all these documents, name of plaintiff is mentioned as B.G. Haran. Ex.P.8 to 10 are the horoscopes of the plaintiff.
.14. Ex.P.11 is the notice issued under Section 80 of CPC and under Section 482 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act to defendants 5 and 6. Ex.P.12 is the RPAD receipts. Ex.P.13 is the RPAD acknowledgments. Ex.P.14 is the affidavit sworn by B.G. Girish that he has changed his son name from B.G. Haran to B.G. Digvijay. Ex.P.15 is the paper publication with regard to change of name in Kannada and English newspapers.
.15. During cross-examination PW.1 admits that he has sought for change the name in the Aadhar card, but he has not made concerned authority as a party. He has stated that his father had studied up to 10 th standard; that he has not obtained birth certificate in the year 2006. He admits that the name given by them is written by BBMP in the records. He has stated that he has not taken any action after change of name but the records discloses that the legal notice has 10 O.S.No. 8864/2019 been issued to the concerned authorities to change the name in the records.
.16. The advocate for the plaintiff has relied upon the decision of Kabir Jaiswal Vs. Union of India reported in AIR 2021 Allahabad 96, wherein, the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad has held as follows:
"individual 'name' is a facet of right of expression, which is guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) R/w Article 21 of the constitution. The freedom of expression as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) includes within its sweep all forms of expressions and name in the present world is clearly a strong expression. Right of freedom of expression through change of name, cannot be denied to candidate and he is entitled to change his name in CBSC certificate."
.17. The advocate for the plaintiff has relied upon the Civil Appeal No. 3905/2011, Jigya Yadav (minor) Vs. CBSE, wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued guidelines to be followed by the CBSE with regard to process the applications for corrections or change in the certificates.
.18. The advocate for plaintiff has relied upon the decision reported in Shreenidhi M.A. Vs. Government of Karnataka and others in RFA No. 947/2013, wherein, the our 11 O.S.No. 8864/2019 Hon'ble High Court has held that the appellant is permitted to change his name from Shreenidhi M.A. to M. Akshaya Ashok.
.19. The above decisions applies to the case on hand. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any malafide intention on the part of the plaintiff to change his name. Hence, point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
.20. Point No.2: The defendants advocate has contended that the declaration sought by the plaintiff is opposed to Section 34 of t he Specific Relief Act. In the light of the judgment in the case of Kabir Jaiswal and Gigya Yadav (Supra), it now well settled that right to change the name is a facet of fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19(1)
(a)of the Constitution of India and cannot be denied. So, the suit for declaration is maintainable.
.21. The defendants advocate has contended that Section 15 of Registration of Birth and Death Act provide for correction of any typographical error and does not allow for change of entire name. Rule 11(4) provides for correction in the entry in birth and death register. It states that "if any person asserts that any entry in the register of birth and 12 O.S.No. 8864/2019 death is erroneous in substance, the Registrar may correct the entry in the manner prescribed under Section 15 upon production by that person and declaration setting for the nature of the error and true facts of the case made by credible persons having knowledge of the facts of the case."
.22. From the above it is clear that there is an opportunity for correction of entry of birth and death. When the Court given direction it is the duty of the authorities to make necessary correction in the records maintained by them. In view of the above discussion and answering point No. 1 in affirmative, the plaintiff is entitled for relief sought for. Hence, I answer issue No. 2 in the affirmative.
.23. Issue No.3: In view of my findings to the above issues 1 and 2, I proceed to pass the following:
O R DE R Suit of the plaintiff is decreed.
It is declared that plaintiff's correct name is B.G. Digvijay instead of B.G. Haran.
It is directed the defendants 2 to 5 to change plaintiff's name as B.G. Digvijay instead of B.G. Haran in all his records.13
O.S.No. 8864/2019 Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, revised by me and after corrections, pronounced in open Court on this the 10th day of March, 2023.) (Sheila B.M.) II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge, Bangalore.
A NN E X U R E
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PLAINTIFF :
P.W.1 : Sri. B.G. Girish.
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PLAINTIFF:
Ex.P.1 Invitation Cover along with card Ex.P.2 Aadhar card Ex.P.3 Birth certificate Ex.P.4 Migration certificate Ex.P.5 Pass certificate Ex.P.6 & 7 Study certificate Ex.P.8 to 10 Horoscope Ex.P.11 Notice Ex.P.12 RPAD receipts (7 in numbers) Ex.P.13 RPAD acknowledgment (6 in number) Ex.P.14 Affidavit Ex.P.15 Paper publication in Kannada Prabha Ex.P.16 Paper publication in Indian Express 14 O.S.No. 8864/2019
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE DEFENDANTS:
Nil
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE DEFENDANTS:
Nil (Sheila B.M.) II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.