Bangalore District Court
Sri. Purushothaman.S.R vs The Principal on 29 July, 2015
IN THE COURT OF THE XLIII ADDL.CITY CIVIL
& SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE. (CCH 44)
Dated: 29th day of July 2015
PRESENT
Sri. R.K.TALIKOTI, B.Com., LL.B.(Spl.),
XLIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE, (CCH-44).
O.S. No. 8607/2014
PLAINTIFF/S: Sri. Purushothaman.S.R. ,
S/o Srinivasaraghavan.G.K,
Aged about 16 years,
Since minor represented by
his father and Natural Guardian
r/at D.No.175, 2 nd Main Road,
4th Cross, Ramanjaneyanagar,
Bangalore - 61.
(By advocate - M. Nagaraju)
Vs.
DEFENDANT/S: 1. The Principal
JyothyKendriya Vidyalaya,
Yelachenahalli,
Kanakapura Road, Bangalore-78.
2. The State of Karnataka
Department of Education.
Represented by its Secretary
2 O.S.No.8607/2014
VidhanaSoudha,
Dr.Ambedkar Veedhi, Bangalore-01.
(Exparte)
3. The Secretary,
Central Board of Secondary Education
(Head Office)
"Shiksha Kendra"
2,Community Centre,
Preetvihar.
Delhi-110092.
4. Regional Officer
New No-3,Old No.1603,
A,"J" Block, 16th Main Road,
Anna Nagar West,
Chennai-600040.
5. The Principal
Alva's Education Foundation(R)
(PU College) Moodabidri
Mangalore District.
(Exparte)
(By Advocates- R.Upadhya-D1; MRS-D.3
& D.4; D.2 and D.5 Exparte)
Date of institution of the suit : 11/11/2014
Nature of the suit : Declaration and
Injunction
Date of commencement of
recording of the evidence : 02/07/2015
3 O.S.No.8607/2014
Date on which the judgment
was pronounced : 29/7/2015
Years Months Days
Duration : 00 08 18
(R.K.TALIKOTI)
XLIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
BANGALORE, (CCH-44).
JUDGMENT
Suit of the plaintiff is for declaration for change of plaintiff's name from Purushothaman S.R to Pranav Chaitanyaa and direct the defendants to make necessary corrections in official records.
2. In brief the averments of the plaint are as under:-
i) The plaintiff Purushothaman SR is a minor represented by his natural guardian. Plaintiff is born out of the wedlock of Srinivas Raghavan G.K. and Vidyashree J on 4 O.S.No.8607/2014 29.07.1998. He is Hindu by Religion. His name is reflected in SSLC certificate issued by CBSE as Purushothaman S R. Thereafter, his name continued in higher education in Alva's Education Foundation, PU College, Moodabidri, Mangalore.
ii) The parents of the plaintiff are staunch believer of Hindu concept and they feel that the name of their son Purushothaman S R is not named in accordance with the Hindu calendar and it is making uncomfortable with the unusual naming of their son in school records. The parents consulted the family Astrologer and Numerologist and as per the jataka of plaintiff, they have suggested that the name should be changed to Pranav Chaitanyaa, otherwise plaintiff may face 5 O.S.No.8607/2014 problems in future. The parents have decided to change the name of plaintiff from Purushothaman S.R and they have issued a paper publication on 23.06.2014 in Hindu and Udayavani Newspapers. Thereafter, he make necessary correction, but they refused to do the same and directed to obtain a decree.
Thereafter, suit is filed.
3. The defendants 1,3 and 4 have appeared through advocates. Defendants 2 and 5 are placed exparte. Defendant no.1 has filed written statement, in brief the contention taken up by defendant no.1 is as under:-
i) The averments of the plaint are frivolous and filed with ulterior motive. The suit is not maintainable.
There is no cause of action to file the suit. The name of the plaintiff is mentioned as Purushothaman S.R in CBSE records. The said 6 O.S.No.8607/2014 names have been entered in the records as per the information furnished by the parents. The plaintiff is not entitled to relief claimed. Hence, suit be dismissed.
4. From the pleadings, following issues are framed by my predecessor in office as follows:-
i) Whether plaintiff proves that his name is to be declared as Pranav Chaitanya from Purushothaman S.R. as alleged in the plaint?
ii) Whether 1st defendant proves that there is no cause of action against 1st defendant and the suit is liable to be dismissed as alleged in the written statement?
iii) Whether plaintiff is entitled for the relief sought for?
iv) What order or decree?7 O.S.No.8607/2014
5. Plaintiff is examined as P.W.1 and as many as 5 documents Exs.P.1 to 5 are marked. Cross-examination is not made. No evidence is adduced on behalf of defendants.
6. Heard the arguments.
7. My findings on the above Issues are :-
1) Point No.1 : In the Affirmative
2) Point No.2 : In the Negative
3) Point No.3 : In the Affirmative.
4) Point No.4 : As per the final order, for the
following :-
REASONS
8. Issue No.1:- The suit of the Plaintiff is for
declaration of his name as Pranav Chaitanyaa and to make necessary correction in the school records. It is the case that he was named as Purushothaman S.R. and his name has been carried out accordingly in CBSE records and PU College records.
According to him his Astrologer and Numerologist has 8 O.S.No.8607/2014 suggested that name should be changed to Pranav Chaitanyaa. Otherwise, he will be put to sufferings.
9. The plaintiff's father is examined as P.W.1. He has stated in his evidence that the Astrologer and Numerologist has looked into the Jataka of his son and has suggested that name should be changed as Pranav Chaitanyaa. The plaintiff has also produced marks card of CBSE and his name is shown as Purushothaman S.R. He has also produced joint affidavit of G.K.Srinivas Raghavan and J.Vidyashree, where it is stated that name has to be changed. The plaintiff has also produced newspapers Hindu and Vijaya Karnataka dated 23.06.2014, wherein the change of name is notified to the public.
10. Defendant no.1 except for opposing the claim of the plaintiff has not placed any material to discard the prayer of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is free to have his name changed as per 9 O.S.No.8607/2014 his belief in the faith followed by him. Specific relief act provides for declaration of such right including change of name.
11. The counsel for the defendants 3 and 4 has produced a copy of notification and a copy of writ order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi in Writ Petition No.(C)3266/2014 - Abhishek Kumar @ Bal Kishan V/s Union of India and others. In the said Writ Petition Rule 69.1 of Examination Bye-Laws of Central Board of Secondary Education has been challenged as illegal and unconstitutional. The said writ is dismissed. The notification dated 27.06.2011 of Central Board of Secondary Education gives out the rules relating to change of name.
12. The notification as well as the writ produced by the defendants 3 and 4 does not come in the way of granting relief by the Civil court when a suit is filed for declaration. The 10 O.S.No.8607/2014 notification regarding change of name and the rule would be to govern the position when the school authorities have to change the name. In my view, there is no hurdle to allow the said prayer. Further, it is not shown that any of the parties will be at a loss. There is nothing on record to show that the plaintiff may make any gain out of it. Hence, plaintiff is entitled to relief of changing his name to Pranav Chaitanyaa. Hence, issue no.1 is answered in the Affirmative.
13. Issue No.2 : The defendant no.1 has taken up the contention that there is no cause of action to file the suit. The plaintiff has pleaded that he is a Hindu by religion and according to his faith his Astrologer has suggested for change of name to have a good future. The plaintiff is entitled to pursue his own faith and belief. Under the circumstances, there is a cause of action for him to file the suit. Hence, Issue no.2 is answered in the Negative.
11 O.S.No.8607/2014
14. Issue Nos.3 and 4 : In view of findings on Issues Nos.1 and 2, plaintiff is entitled to decree of change of his name as Pranav Chaitanyaa, I proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed. No costs. It is declared that name of the plaintiff is changed to Pranav Chaitanyaa in place of S.R. Purushothaman. The defendants are directed to carry out the change of name in their records as per the declaration made by this court.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed, computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court today i.e., on 29th day of July 2015) (R.K. TALIKOTI) XLIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, BANGALORE, (CCH-44).12 O.S.No.8607/2014
ANNEXURE List of witness examined for the plaintiff/s:-
P.W.1 G.K. Srinivas Raghavan List of witness examined for the defendant/s:-
--Nil--
List of Exhibits/Documents marked for the plaintiff/s:-
Ex.P1 Original SSLC marks card
Ex.P2 Original affidavit
Ex.P3 &4 Paper publications in Hindu and Vijaya
Karnataka
Ex.P5 Reply notice
List of Exhibits/documents marked for the defendant/s:
-- Nil --
(R.K. TALIKOTI) XLIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, C.C.H.44, BANGALORE.13 O.S.No.8607/2014
Judgment pronounced in open court vide separate judgment:-
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is decreed. No costs.
It is declared that name of the plaintiff is changed to Pranav Chaitanyaa in place of S.R. Purushothaman. The defendants are directed to carry out the change of name in their records as per the declaration made by this court.
(R.K. TALIKOTI) XLIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, C.C.H.44, BANGALORE.14 O.S.No.8607/2014