Bangalore District Court
Yadvi G vs The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Karnataka on 18 February, 2025
OS 3231/2024-Judgment
KABC010115532024
IN THE COURT OF THE XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS
JUDGE (CCH 12), BENGALURU
DATED: 18th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
PRESENT
SMT. JYOTHSNA D., LL.B., LL.M., D.F.A.,
XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,(CCH12) BENGALURU
ORIGINAL SUIT No.3231/2024
PLAINTIFF KUMARI YADVI G.,
Aged about 6 years,
being minor Rep. By
natural Guardian mother
SMT. GEETHA R.,
Residing at No.203,
2nd Floor,
Sri Sri Pradhan Apartment,
Chowdeshwari Temple Street,
Byrasandra Banyan Tree,
C.V. Raman Nagar,
Bengaluru 560 093.
Represented by Smt/Sri S.M., Advocate
-- vs --
1
OS 3231/2024-Judgment
DEFENDANTS 1) THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
Government of Karnataka,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bengaluru 560 001.
2. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA
PALIKE,
Office of the Asst.Director (Statistics),
East Zone,
P.V. Bldg., M.G.Road, Bangalore - 1.
Hennur Police Station,
Bengaluru 560 043.
Deft.No.1 by DGP
Deft.No.2 by N.S., Advocate
Date of Institution of suit 27.04.2024
Nature of suit DECLARATION SUIT
Date of commencement of evidence 05.12.2024
Date of Judgment 18.02.2025
Duration Year/s Month/s Day/s
00 09 21
(SMT. JYOTHSNA D.,)
XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BENGALURU (CCH 12)
2
OS 3231/2024-Judgment
JUDGMENT
This suit is filed by the mother of plaintiff as her natural guardian as she is minor and she wants to change the birth name of the plaintiff as YADVI G., in the place of her present name Yazhini S., and sought for declaration of her new name as YADVI G., and for such other reliefs as this Court deems fit as per facts and circumstances of the case.
2. In brief, the case of the plaintiff is that :- Plaintiff married one Sathish Kumar on 30.06.2017 as per Hindu Rights and Customs and it was an arranged marriage and out of their wedlock, she has a daughter by name Yadvi, born on 31.05.2018.
3. At the time of birth of the above child, she was given the name as Yadvi G.S., and accordingly, the same was reflected in the Birth Certificate. However, the plaintiff's husband went and changed her daughter's name as Yazhini S., and therefore, the same was reflected in the Birth Certificate also.
4. As there is no proper and good relationship between herself and her husband, the plaintiff has filed a petition for 3 OS 3231/2024-Judgment dissolution of her marriage with her husband, which came to be decreed on 17.08.2023, dissolving their marriage.
5. From the date of birth of the above child, she has been taking care of the child in all respects, giving her medical care, food, clothing and education till date. Her husband at no point of time has taken care nor shown any interest of the child till date.
6. From the date of birth of the child, she has been facing several hurdles in respect of her life and moreover, the child is always sick and hence, on consultation with an astrologer, the plaintiff was informed that the digits in the name of the child as Yadvi G.S., as well as Yazhini S., are not good and has to be made mild changes for the prosperity of the child and the family. Hence, the plaitnfif has decided on consultation with the astrologer to change the name of the child as Yadvi G.
7. As the plaintiff intends to admit her child to school, she wants to change the name of her daughter as Yadvi G., in her Birth Certificate. Hence, the plaintiff has approached the office of the second defendant, but her request was denied vide endorsement dated 15.12.2023. Hence, having no other alternative, the plaintiff caused notice to the defendants as 4 OS 3231/2024-Judgment provided under Section 80 CPC and the copy of which is produced along with the plaint. Hence, filed this suit.
8. The cause of action for the suit arose when the plaintiff got issued legal notice on 31.01.2024 to the defendants and subsequently, within the jurisdiction of this Court. The plaintiff has paid proper court fee on the plaint and hence, prayed to decree the suit as prayed.
9. Though the defendants reported their appearance through their respective counsel, but, neither filed written statement nor cross examined PW 1 nor lead their evidence. Hence, the case of the plaintiff is remained unchallenged.
10. To prove the case of plaintiff, as she is minor her mother as her natural guardian entered into witness box herself examined by oath as PW 1 and filed her sworn affidavit of examination in chief in which all the plaint averments are reiterated.
11. Heard, perused materials placed on record and accordingly, the following Points arose for consideration of this Court;
5
OS 3231/2024-Judgment Point No 1 : Whether the natural guardian of plaintiff proves that she is changing the name of plaintiff from YAZHINI S., to YADVI G.?
Point No 2 : Whether plaintiff is entitled to get relief as prayed?
Point No 3 : What order or decree?
12. Heard, perused materials placed on record and accordingly this court answers above Points as under;
Point No 1 : In the affirmative, Point No 2 : In the affirmative, Point No 3 : As per the final Order;
For the following;
REASONS
13. Point No 1 and 2 :- These two Points are inter- connected to each other, hence, to avoid repeated discussions they are taken up together hereunder;
Admittedly, this suit is filed by the mother of plaintiff as her natural guardian as she is minor and she wants to change the born name of the plaintiff as YADVI G., in the place of her present name Yazhini S., and sought for declaration of her new 6 OS 3231/2024-Judgment name as YADVI G., and for such other reliefs as this Court may deems fit as per facts and circumstances of the case.
14. In the documentary evidence of PW 1, Ex.P 1 is the birth certificate of plaintiff which shows that "YADVI G.S." named female child born to Geetha R., and Satish Kumar on 31-05-2018 in C.V. Raman General Hospital, Indiranagar, BBMP, Bengaluru, Karnataka. This birth certificate was issued on 25-07-2018 and date of registration is 06-06-2018. Ex.P 7 is another birth certificate issued by BBMP on 28-11-2018 which shows plaintiff's name is changed as YAZHINI S. Other particulars in Ex.P 7 is as same as in Ex.P 1.
15.Ex.P 2 is the endorsement issued by BBMP dated 15-12-2023 by referring application No.11508 dated 04-11-2023 filed by PW 1 to change the name of plaintiff as "YADVI G." In the said document it is stated as:-
"ಮಗುವಿನ ಹೆಸರು ಈಗಾಗಲೇ Yadvi G.S., ಎಂದು ನೊಂದಾಯಿಸಲಾಗಿರುವ ಹೆಸರಿನ ಬದಲಾಗಿ Yazhini S., ಎಂದು ಬದಲಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಲಾಗಿದ್ದು , ಈಗ ಮತ್ತೊ ಮ್ಮೆ ಮಗುವಿನ ಹೆಸರು Yadvi G., ಎಂದು ಬದಲಾವಣೆ ಮಾಡಲು ರಹವಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲ ವೆಂದು ತಿಳಿಸಿದೆ."
It shows that frequently the name of the child is changed from Yadvi G.S., to Yazhini S., and again Yazhini S., to Yadvi G.S. 7 OS 3231/2024-Judgment And now again plaintiff wants to change her name as Yadvi G. Ex.P 8 is the Aadhaar card of PW 1.
16. Ex.P 6 is the certified copy of judgment in M C No.1933/2019 which shows that marriage of the parents of plaintiff is dissolved through court of law. In this document name of spouses is shown as Geetha R (PW 1) and Sathish Kumar. Then, it gives presumption that in the initial suffixed to the name of the plaintiff, "G" stands for mother's name "Geetha" and "S" stands for father's name Sathish Kumar. Now, mother of plaintiff wants to restrict it only to the extent of her name Geetha as "G". Though she gave reason for changing of name is the suggestion of astrologer in her plaint, but neither the documents issued by astrologer are produced nor the astrologer is brought to witness box.
17. Ex.P 3 is the legal notice dated 31-01-2024 sent by PW 1 through her counsel to the defendants. Ex.P 4 and Ex.P 5 are the postal documents which show that PW 1 has complied provisions under Section 80 of CPC prior to filing of this suit.
18. The above documentary evidence of plaintiff through PW 1 has remained unchallenged as there is no written statement filed and no cross examination of PW 1. And 8 OS 3231/2024-Judgment defendants have also not lead their evidence in contra to evidence of PW 1 which leads to presumption under Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act as this suit is filed prior to enforcement of Bharatheeya Sakshya Adiniyama.
19. As a civil right one case change his name as per his will and wish but not for whims and fancy and the same is opined in plenty of precedents. As the name is used for identity of a person and if it is changed, it will not effect on his other rights and it will not harm the general public. Hence, Section 34 of Specific Relief Act gives grounds to declare one's name. But, such changing of name shall be noticed to the public by way of publication of public notice which has wide circulation as the changing of identification of person in society shall be noticed by the public as the person is a social being who is living with system and order in the society at large.
20. In this regard the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Rayaan Chawla vs University Of Delhi & Anr. on 6 November, 2020 (AIR 2021 (NOC) 229 (DEL.)) observed as;
"14. Hence, the aforesaid judgment has clearly stated that to have a name and to express the same in the manner he wishes, is a part of the right to freedom of 9 OS 3231/2024-Judgment speech and expression under Article 19 (1) (a) as well as right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It cannot be denied that the right to change a name is a protected right and the petitioner would normally be not denied the said right on technical issues.
15. In the present facts reference may also be had to the judgment of the Division Bench of this court in the case of Abhishek Kumar v. Union of India & Ors., 2014 SCC OnLine Del 3459, which was also dealing with a case of change of name. However, that was a case in which the petitioner therein sought to change his name after he had passed out of CBSE/School. It was in those facts, the Division Bench held as follows:
16. Else, we are of the opinion that the issuance of revised certificates with changed name as sought by the petitioner would create a discrepancy and reflect a status which did not exist at the time of issuance thereof. The petitioner though has changed his name, but after the date of issuance of the said certificates.
Axiomatically the certificates cannot bear the changed name. If anyone were to make a deeper inquiry, they will wonder that if the name was changed only in 2011, how the changed name appears on certificates issued on a prior date. Rather the procedure of having a Gazette Notification for changed name is intended to obviate the said difficulties and to give sanctity to the 10 OS 3231/2024-Judgment change in name. The said view was taken by one of us (Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.) in Pallavi @ Pallavi Chandra v. C.B.S.E. MANU/DE/2842/2010 and in order dated 9th November, 2010 in W.P.C) No. 4044/2010 titled Ashik Gurung v. CBSE and which matters are not found to have been W.P.(C) 6813/2020 Page 11 of 16 agitated further. We see no reason to take a different view."
Further opined that;
"23. The legal position that would follow from the above conspectus of the judgments noted and cited by the learned counsel for the parties is that normally a person would have a right to have his name changed subject to fulfilment of appropriate formalities/procedures to ensure that there is no misuse or confusion created on account of the change in name. The change of name is prospective. As noted above, in my opinion, the insistence of respondent No.1/University of Delhi to interpret the appropriate Resolution of the Executive Council/Notification dated 01.07.2015 read with 16.12.2015 to insist that though the name is being changed in 2019, the petitioner must first get the certificates issued by CBSE in 2018 i.e. prior to W.P.(C) 6813/2020 Page 15 of 16 the change of name also changed appears to be a misplaced interpretation of the said provision. The petitioner cannot be asked to do 11 OS 3231/2024-Judgment the impossible as the names as reflected in the Class 10th and 12th certificates cannot be changed as there is no change of name retrospectively. A meaningful interpretation has to be given to the aforesaid Notifications dated 01.07.2015 and 16.12.2015/ Resolution of respondent No.1 so that it does not seek or does not direct the petitioner to perform an impossible task."
21. Therefore, it is clear that one can change his name as his civil right. But it shall be brought to the notice of public to avoid confusions on his identity.
22. But here in this case, no such self-declaration by attested affidavit and public notice of changing of name by either self-declaration before notary public or through publication in Gazette Notification of changing of the name of the minor child (Plaintiff ) by her parents/mother has been taken prior to filing of this suit and no such documents are produced. But changing of minor children name is permissible under law as discussed above. Though there is frequent changing of name, but the same names are rotating again and again by changing its initials. In paragraph 15 of Ex.P 6, it is noted that the father of plaintiff has not taken any care and welfare of this minor child and PW 1 returned from matrimonial 12 OS 3231/2024-Judgment home with child. And after dissolution of marriage, when she is living with plaintiff, which shows her single parentage. If now the name of plaintiff is changed by her mother as she is minor to look into her welfare and as per law in future dates after attaining the majority of 18 years and till the age of 21 age, the plaintiff has option to opt this name or change it as her will and wish. But at present as her natural guardian for the welfare of child she has civil right to change her name.
23. Therefore, as discussed above it is proved that plaintiff is minor daughter of PW 1. Then she can change the name of plaintiff. But they have to follow due process of changing of the name of her daughter by publication of public notice in the newspaper which has wide circulation as per this judgment. And she is duty bound to surrender all the birth certificates of plaintiff received by her from BBMP to BBMP while obtaining new birth certificate.
24. Therefore, as per the facts and circumstances of the case and above discussions, this court is of the opinion that PW has established the case of the plaintiff and she is entitled to get relief subject to taking newspaper publication and surrendering to the BBMP all the previous birth certificates 13 OS 3231/2024-Judgment issued to her. Accordingly this Court answers Point Nos.1 and 2 in the Affirmative.
25. Point No.3:- For the foregoing reasons and discussions and considering the findings on the above points, suit of the plaintiff deserves to be decreed with direction to take paper publication by way of public notice within two months from the date of judgment, with direction to surrender all previous birth certificates to BBMP while getting fresh birth certificate with present name. Accordingly this court proceeds to pass the following:
ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed.
It is hereby declared that the name of the plaintiff is YADVI G., in the place of her present name YAZHINI S., with a condition to bring the said fact of change of her name to public by way of public notice through newspaper publication as per this judgment in the newspaper which has wide circulation within two months from the date of judgment.
Office is hereby directed to draw decree accordingly only on the report of public notice 14 OS 3231/2024-Judgment through paper publication by receiving the newspaper publication to the court file from plaintiff.
Plaintiff is at liberty to move an application before the concerned authorities for necessary entries in register of birth and issue for birth certificate as per decree.
PW 1 is directed to surrender all previous birth certificates of plaintiff issued to her by concerned department of BBMP to that department.
Office is directed to return the original documents to PW 1 which are marked as exhibits in this case after receiving certified copies of the same afresh to court file with her proper identification.
No order as to costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the Senior Sheristedar on Computer, typed and then print out of the same taken by him, after corrections, signed and pronounced by me in Open Court on 18.02.2025) (SMT. JYOTHSNA D.,) XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE(CCH12), BENGALURU ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for the plaintiff.
PW 1 - Smt. Geetha R., 15 OS 3231/2024-Judgment List of witnesses examined for the defendants.
Nil.
List of documents marked for the plaintiff.
Ex.P.1 - Birth Certificate of the plaintiff Ex.P.2 - Endorsement dated 15.12.2023 issued by BBMP Ex.P.3 - Office Copy of Legal Notice dated 31.01.2024 Ex.P.4 - 2 Postal Receipts Ex.P.5 - Postal Acknolwedgement Ex.P.6 - Certified copy of Order in MC No.1933/2019 Ex.P.7 - Birth Certificate of Yazhini S., Ex.P.8 - Aadhaar Card of PW 1 List of documents marked for the defendants.
Nil.
(SMT. JYOTHSNA D.,) XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE(CCH12), BENGALURU 16 OS 3231/2024-Judgment (Judgment pronounced in Open Court vide separate Judgment. Order portion reads as under) ORDER The suit of the plaintiff is hereby decreed.
It is hereby declared that the name of the plaintiff is YADVI G., in the place of her present name YAZHINI S., with a condition to bring the said fact of change of her name to public by way of public notice through newspaper publication as per this judgment in the newspaper which has wide circulation within two months from the date of judgment.
Office is hereby directed to draw decree accordingly only on the report of public notice through paper publication by receiving the newspaper publication to the court file from plaintiff.
Plaintiff is at liberty to move an application before the concerned authorities for necessary entries in register of birth and issue for birth certificate as per decree.
PW 1 is directed to surrender all previous birth certificates of plaintiff issued to her by concerned department of BBMP to that department.
Office is directed to return the original documents to PW 1 which are marked as exhibits in 17 OS 3231/2024-Judgment this case after receiving certified copies of the same afresh to court file with her proper identification.
No order as to costs.
Draw decree accordingly.
XVI ADDL.CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE(CCH12), BENGALURU 18