Bangalore District Court
Lara Roshni Mathan Pereira vs Principal Sacred Heart Girls High ... on 10 October, 2025
/ 1 / O.S.No.1424/2015
KABC010036882015
IN THE COURT OF XLII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-43)
- : PRESENT :-
Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv
XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
Dated this 10th Day of October, 2025.
ORIGINAL SUIT NO.1424/2015
Plaintiff :
1. Smt.Jolarpettai Mathan Lara
W/o.Dr.Savio Pereira & Sole legitimate
D/o. Late Dr. Jolarpettai Adimoolam
Mathan (An Adi Dravida Scheduled
Caste Hindu) and Agnes Flora (A
Roman Catholic Christian), 41 Years,
R/o.No. 573, 3rd Floor, 5th Avenue,
Teachers Colony, Venkatapura,
Koramangala, Bengaluru - 560 034.
2. Dr.Savio Pereira (Deleted vide order
dated 16.8.2025)
[In person]
/ 2 / O.S.No.1424/2015
/ VERSUS /
Defendants :
1. Principal, Sacred Heart Girls High
School, Richmond Road, Bengaluru-25.
2. Parish Priest, Sacred Heart Church, 62,
Richmond Road, MSGR.D'Souza Circle,
Bengaluru - 560 025.
3. District Superintendent, Holston
Hospital, Station Road, Yadgir-585 202.
4. Parish Priest, Church of Our Lady of
Health, AC Guards, Khairatabad,
Hyderabad, Telengana - 500004.
5. Parish Priest, Holy Ghost Church, No.8,
Davis Road, Pillanna Garden, Richards
Town, Bengaluru - 560 084.
6. Parish Priest, Our Lady of Health
Church, MSGR. F.Noronha Road,
Shivajinagar, Bengaluru - 560 051.
7. Parish Priest, St.Anthony's Church,
Puliakulam, Coimbatore,
Tamil Nadu - 641 045.
8. Parish Priest, St.Patrick's Church, 15-K,
Brigade Road, Shanthala Nagar, Ashok
Nagar, Bengaluru - 560 025.
/ 3 / O.S.No.1424/2015
9. Arch-Bishop of Bangalore,
Archbishop's House, 75, Millers Road,
P.B.4650, Bengaluru - 560 046.
10. Parish Priest, Mother of God Church,
Majorda, Salcete, Goa - 403 713.
11. Apostolic Nuncio, Apostolic
Nunciature, 50-C, Niti Marg,
Chanakyapuri, New Delhi - 110021.
12. Parish Priest, St.Anthony's Friary,
Hosur Road, Madiwala, Bengaluru -34.
13. Director, St.Philomena's Hospital,
Mother Teresa Road, Xavier Layout,
Victoria Layout, Bengaluru - 560 075.
[Defendants No.2, 5, 7, 8 and 10 - Ex-
parte.
Sri.J.P.R., Advocate for Defendant No.1
Sri.D.L.R. - Advocate for D.2, 6, 9, 12.
Sri.S.S., Advocate for D.4.
Defendant No. 11 - dismissed.
Sri.S.P., Advocate for D.13.]
Date of Institution of the suit : 11.02.2015
Nature of suit : Suit for declarations
Date of commencement of : 05.12.2024
evidence
/ 4 / O.S.No.1424/2015
Date on which the judgment : 10.10.2025
is pronounced
Duration taken for disposal : Years Months Days
10 07 29
***
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by the plaintiff against the defendants for the relief of declaration of caste, rectification of school records, etc.,
2. The case of the plaintiff in brief is as under : -
The grandfather of plaintiff was one by name Jolarpettai Tambi Adimoolam. Father of plaintiff was by name Dr. Jolarpettai Adimoolam Mathan. They were belonging to Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu community. The father of plaintiff Dr. Jolarpettai Adimoolam Mathan married Christian woman by name Agnes Flora under the Special Marriage Act. But, the / 5 / O.S.No.1424/2015 father of plaintiff did not convert himself to christianity and he remained as Hindu. So, plaintiff being his daughter remained as Hindu and she has not converted into Christian community.
3. It is further case of the plaintiff that, she was born on 30.4.1973 in Holston Hospital, Yadgir. Her mother played fraud upon her and created infant Baptism on 10.6.1973. Since it is the outcome of fraud, it is non-est and null and void ab-initio. Since her father never converted into Christian community, and hence, he has no name by name Anthony Mathan. The infant Baptism does not amount to voluntarily conversion. She also pleaded that in her school records it is mentioned that she belongs to Christian community. Her mother committed murder of her husband and illegally buried the dead body on 18.10.1975 by following Christian rites.
/ 6 / O.S.No.1424/2015 She being legitimate daughter of J.A.Mathan inherits the caste of the father and not of mother. So, she is governed by Hindu Law. Her caste is Hindu Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste, but not Christian caste. She requested the defendant to change her caste in her school records, but it was in vain. Hence, cause of action arose to the plaintiff to file this suit. She prayed to declare her caste as Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu by birth. She also prayed rectification of her school records by correcting her father's name as Jolarpettai Adimoolam Mathan and not J.Antony Mathan. She also prayed to rectify the records of her father Dr. Jolarpettai Adimoolam Mathan as Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu and not Roman Catholic Christian, for rectification in her school and Baptism related records that she is Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu and not Christian. She also sought direction / 7 / O.S.No.1424/2015 for deleting the fraudulent entry in the Baptism Register and declare as it is null and void and ab-initio. She also sought for rectification of entry in Marriage Register in Mother of God Church Majorda, Goa by showing her father's caste as Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu.
4. On service of suit summons, defendant No.1 appeared and filed written statement. Suit against defendant No.11 was dismissed. Defendants No.2, 4, 6, 9 and 12 and defendant No.13 though appeared through their counsels, but, they have not chosen to file written statement. Though suit summons was served upon defendants No.3, 5, 7, 8 and 10, they remained absent and hence, they were placed as ex-parte.
5. Defendant No.1 filed written statement contending that as per the information furnished by the / 8 / O.S.No.1424/2015 mother of plaintiff Mrs.Agnes Flora on 18.1.1978, plaintiff was admitted to their school. As per the admission form filed by the mother, plaintiff was shown as Roshni Mathan, her date of birth is shown as 30.4.1973. Her father's name is shown as Dr. J. A. Mathan. So, there is no any fault on their part while describing the plaintiff as Roshni Mathan and father's name as Dr.J.A.Mathan. So, they prayed to dismiss the suit with costs.
6. On the basis of the above pleadings, my predecessor in office has framed the following issues :
(1) Whether the plaintiff proves the suit is in present form for declaration of caste is maintainable before Civil Court ?
(2) What order or decree?
7. Plaintiff No.2 being the husband of plaintiff No.1 was party to this suit, but this Court by order dated / 9 / O.S.No.1424/2015 16.8.2025 directed the plaintiff No.1 to delete plaintiff No.2 as he is not at all necessary and proper party to the suit. In order to prove the case, the plaintiff has got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to P.17. Defendants neither cross-examined her nor led their evidence.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff. She filed written argument and relied the citation reported in ILR 1996 KAR 3693 - State of Karnataka Vs. Varadashankar Chinnappa Javalgi. Perused the pleadings, issues, evidence oral and documentary, materials on record, written argument of the plaintiff and the citation relied by the plaintiff.
9. My findings to the aforesaid Issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : In the negative.
/ 10 / O.S.No.1424/2015
Issue No.2 : As per the final order for
the following:
REASONS
10. ISSUE NO.1 : - Plaintiff filed evidence affidavit by reiterating the contents of the plaint. Ex.P.1 is the declaration of date of birth of her father Mathan J.A., which discloses the date of birth as 8.7.1939. It is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove the caste of her father. Ex.P.2 is the Certificate of Baptism, discloses the name of plaintiff as Roshni Mathan and her date of birth as 30.4.1973 and the place of Baptism as Golconda. This document is challenged by the plaintiff as null and void and ab-initio. The plaintiff was born on 30.4.1973 and the date of Baptism was 10.6.1973. As on that date, her father was alive, but he has not opposed said Baptism. Plaintiff filed this suit in the year 2015. All along she never challenged Baptism. So, her case that this / 11 / O.S.No.1424/2015 document is created by her mother by playing fraud upon her own child and upon her husband, cannot be accepted. In this Baptism Certificate, name of the father of the child is shown as J.Anthony Mathan and name of the mother is shown as Agnes Flora. In this document, the father 's profession was shown as Doctor. The case of the plaintiff that her father's name was wrongly shown as Anthony Mathan, is without any proof. This document is challenged by the plaintiff after 42 years. This relief is barred by law of limitation. Plaintiff herself is an Advocate by profession. She has not challenged the said document immediately after she attaining the age of majority. So, I hold that the suit of the plaintiff claiming relief that infant Baptism as null and void or ab-initio or not existing is without any merits.
/ 12 / O.S.No.1424/2015
11. Ex.P.3 is the birth registration extract. The son of her mother by name N.Sunil wherein his father's name is shown as Dr.J.A.Mathan and mother's name is shown as Agnes Flora. This document is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove her case that her father's caste as Adi Dravida Scheduled Caste Hindu. Ex.P.4 is the office copy of the complaint given by mother of the plaintiff by alleging that the present plaintiff is harassing her. The recitals of this complaint that her husband J.A.Mathan remained as Hindu and was not converted into Christian community, cannot be accepted. As per the case of the plaintiff her father's last rituals was conducted as per Christian community and dead body was buried in Roman Catholic Church cemetery. If deceased was following Hindu rites, then his last respect should not have been conducted by following Christian community / 13 / O.S.No.1424/2015 rites. So, this document is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove that her father was never converted as Christian.
12. Ex.P.5 is Declaration Affidavit filed by the plaintiff on 12.12.2014 i.e., before filing of this suit and it has no evidentiary value. Ex.P.6 is the Marriage Registration Extract of J.A.Mathan and Agnes Flora. In this document there is a reference that J.A.Mathan was not Baptized and he was shown as Hindu. Only because at the time of marriage he was not converted as Hindu, it cannot be said that later he was never converted into Christian. So, this document is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove her case. Ex.P.7 is Obstetrical Register issued by Holston Hospital, Yadagiri to show that plaintiff was born in hospital, this document is helpful to plaintiff to prove her date of birth, but not to prove her caste.
Ex.P.8 is again certificate of Baptism. Ex.P.9 is the
/ 14 / O.S.No.1424/2015
document submitted by St.Patrick's Church to the Police Inspector, Ashok Nagar police stating that the dead body of J.A.Mathan was buried in Christian cemetery by following Christian rites. This document is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove her case. Exs.P.10 and P.11 are the certificates issued by Sacred Heart Church to show that, at the time of marriage J.A.Mathan was not Baptitised. But as stated above, these documents are not helpful to the plaintiff to prove her case.
13. Ex.P.12 is the certified copy of Writ Petition No.18169-170/2014 (GM-CC). As per the Order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the present plaintiff was directed to approach jurisdictional Tahasildar seeking caste certificate as scheduled caste. So, this document is not at all helpful to the plaintiff to prove her case and looking to the reliefs claimed by the plaintiff, it is crystal / 15 / O.S.No.1424/2015 clear that she wants the relief from the Civil Court to declare her as person belonging to scheduled caste, but the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to grant this relief. Declaration of caste is beyond the jurisdiction of Civil Court. As per the order passed in writ petition as stated above, the petitioner was directed to approach Tahasildar seeking caste certificate. So, the civil suit is not at all maintainable. The citation relied by the plaintiff reported in ILR 1996 KAR 3693 - State of Karnataka Vs. Varadashankar Chinnappa Javalgi is not at all helpful to the plaintiff. In the said case plaintiff filed suit stating that he belongs to 'Hindu Koshti' caste and his school records containing his caste as 'Hindu Lingayat' be deleted. But, the said case was not for declaration of caste as scheduled castes or scheduled tribe. The caste Koshti and Jadar comes under backward community, but / 16 / O.S.No.1424/2015 not comes under scheduled caste. Hence, the said Judgment cannot be applied to the facts of this case.
14. As per the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in S.Swvagiradoss Vs. Zonal Manager, FCI reported in AIR 1996 SC 1182 is applicable to the facts of this case, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court held that, under Section 9 of C.P.C. Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try and entertain suit seeking declaration of caste as a scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. The Hon'ble Apex Court held as under :
"Schedule - I relates to scheduled caste and schedule - II relates to scheduled tribes. Christian is not a scheduled caste under the notification issued by the President. In view of the admitted position that the petitioner was born of a Christian parents and his parents also were converted prior to his birth and no longer remained to be Adi Dravida, a scheduled caste for the purpose of Tirunelaveli / 17 / O.S.No.1424/2015 District in Tamil Nadu as notified by the President, petitioner cannot claim to be scheduled caste. In the light of the constitutional scheme civil Court has not jurisdiction under Section 9 of CPC to entertain the suit. The suit therefore, is not maintainable. The High Court, therefore, was right in dismissing the suit as not maintainable and also not giving any declaration sought for."
In the said case also parties were belonging to Adi- Dravida caste hailing from Kattalai Village in Tirunelveli District, Tamilnadu. In the said case they were converted into Christian religion. But, in this case, the father of the plaintiff at the time of marriage with Christian woman was not converted into Christian, but there is no material on record to show that plaintiff's father was never converted into Christian community. As per the plaint itself her husband's name i.e., plaintiff No.2's name is shown as Dr.Savio Pereira. So, it appears that he is a / 18 / O.S.No.1424/2015 Christian person and her case is that she still remain as Hindu and to declare her caste as scheduled caste is without jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, I hold that the suit itself is not at all maintainable. By applying the above said citation to the case on hand I hold that this Court has no jurisdiction to declare the caste of the plaintiff. Accordingly, I answer Issue No.1 in the negative.
15. ISSUE NO.2 : - In view of my answer to Issue No.1 in negative, I proceed to pass the following : -
ORDER The suit filed by the plaintiff is dismissed with costs.
(Dictated to the Stenographer Grade-I, transcribed by her, corrected the same directly on computer, signed and then pronounced by me, in open court on this the 10th day of October, 2025).
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
***
/ 19 / O.S.No.1424/2015
ANNEXURE
1. List of witnesses examined for plaintiff :
P.W.1 : Smt.Jolarpettai Mathan Lara
2. List of documents exhibited for plaintiff :
Ex.P.1 : Declaration of date of birth of father of plaintiff.
Ex.P.2 : Certificate of Baptism
Ex.P.3 : Extract of register of Births and
Deaths
Ex.P.4 : Office copy of the complaint given by
mother of the plaintiff to Inspector of Madiwala police station - reply to the police notice Ex.P.5 : Declaration Affidavit filed by the plaintiff on 12.12.2014 Ex.P.6 : Marriage Registration Extract of J.A.Mathan and Agnes Flora.
Ex.P.7 : Obstetrical Register extract issued by Holston Hospital, Yadagiri.
Ex.P.8 : Certificate of Baptism - document of Shrine of Our Lady Ex.P.9 : C/c of Letter submitted by St.Patrick's Church to the Police Inspector, Ashok Nagar police / 20 / O.S.No.1424/2015 Ex.P.10 & P.11: Certificates issued by Sacred Heart Church .
Ex.P.12 : C/c of Order in Writ Petition No.18169- 170/2014 (GM-CC).
Ex.P.13 : C/c of letter issued by District Social Welfare Office Ex.P.14 : C/c of documents obtained from CCH-71 in PCR page No.13 to 15
Ex.P.15 : Affidavit / declaration for change of name for major.
Ex.P.16 ; Newspaper - Vartha Bharathi Ex.P.17 : Deccan Chronicle newspaper Ex.P.16(a) : Publication marked in Ex.P.16 Ex.P.17(a) : Publication marked in Ex.P.17
3. List of witnesses examined for the defendant :
- NIL -
4. List of documents exhibited for defendant :
- NIL -
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
***
/ 21 / O.S.No.1424/2015
Judgment pronounced in open Court [vide separate judgment] :
ORDER The suit filed by the plaintiff is dismissed with costs.
(Chinnannavar Rajesh Sadashiv), XLII ACC&S Judge, Bengaluru City.