Allowed

Sri. Nandan, v. the Chief Secretary

Karnataka HC17 Nov 2023RFA/1877/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This first appeal was filed against a dismissal of a suit seeking a declaration for the petitioner's name change from 'Imran Pasha' to 'Nandan' and a consequential mandatory injunction against educational authorities. The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court judgment, and decreed the suit after additional evidence including an affidavit and newspaper publications was admitted.

What did the court decide?

The appealed judgment and decree set aside; suit decreed for declaration and mandatory injunction regarding name change.

Sri. Nandan, Vs the Chief Secretary — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1877 OF 2023 (DEC)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI. NANDAN, (EARLIER KNOWN AS M IMRAN PASHA) S/O MOHAMMED MOULA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT NO.179, GUDIMAVU KUMBALAGODU, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 060.

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. T N VISWANATHA.,ADVOCATE) AND:

¶9

THE CHIEF SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶10

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY OF GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶12

THE JOINT SECRETARY OF THE GOVERNMENT, PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶13

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, BENGALURU SOUTH DISTRICT, NO.12, DISPENSARY ROAD, OPPOSITE KIMS HOSPITAL,

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶15

KALASIPALYA, BENGALURU – 560 002.

¶16

THE BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER BENGALURU SOUTH DIVISION, NO.55/55, 9TH MAIN ROAD, KEB COLONY, NEW GURAPPANA PALYA, BTM LAYOUT- I, BENGALURU – 560 029.

¶17

THE SECRETARY, THE PRE-UNIVERSITY BOARD, 18TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.

¶18

THE SECRETARY/DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA SECONDARY EXAMINATION EDUCATION BOARD, 6^TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU – 560 003.

¶19

THE PRINCIPAL/HEAD MASTER, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, GOLLAHALLI, KUMBALAGODU, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 074.

¶20

THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT PU COLLEGE, OLD FORT, CHAMARAJAPET, BENGALURU – 560 018.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI.MAHANTESH SHETTAR.,AGA)

¶23

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 24.06.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.1266/2023 ON THE FILE OF VIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU., DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶26

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 24.06.2023 passed in O.S.No.1266/2023 by the VIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the said suit filed by the appellant – plaintiff for declaration that his name was “Nandan” instead of “Imran Pasha” and for consequential mandatory injunction directing the respondents – defendants to enter the plaintiff’s name as “Nandan” instead of “Imran Pasha” in their records was dismissed by the Trial Court.

¶29

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

¶30

counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶31

The material on record discloses that the plaintiff was born in a Muslim family and was named as Imran Pasha, which name was entered in his school and college records. It was contended that on 26.12.2020, the plaintiff got his name changed to Nandan in a ritual known as ‘Shuddikarana Ceremony’ at Arya Samaj, Bangalore and got converted to Hinduism and approached

¶32

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶33

the respondents seeking change of his name as ‘Nandan’ in their records and since his requests were not complied with by the respondents, the appellant instituted the aforesaid suit before the trial Court. The respondents – defendants remained ex-parte in the suit and did not contest the same. The plaintiff examined himself as PW-1 and Exs.P1 to P6 were marked on his behalf. The trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and decree dismissing the suit, aggrieved by which, the appellant – plaintiff is before this Court by way of the present appeal.

¶34

A perusal of the material on record including the impugned judgment and decree will clearly indicate that the sole ground on which the trial court has dismissed the suit is by coming to the conclusion that the plaintiff had not executed a name change Affidavit and had not issued paper publications regarding change of his name to “Nandan” instead of “Imran Pasha”. In this regard, the appellant has filed an application I.A.1/2023 enclosing copies of name change Affidavit dated 28.07.2023 and two Newspaper publications dated 29.07.2023 published in ‘Kannada Prabha’ and ‘News Trail’ regarding change of his name as “Nandan” instead of “Imran Pasha”. A perusal of the application and documents

¶35

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶36

produced along with I.A.1/2023 will clearly indicate that the appellant had made out valid and sufficient grounds to allow production of additional evidence. Accordingly, I.A.No.1/2023 is allowed and the additional documents are marked as Exs.P7, P8 and P9 respectively.

¶37

As stated supra, the sole reason, on which the trial court has dismissed the suit is on the ground that the plaintiff had not executed a name change Affidavit nor issued news paper publications. However, in the light of the aforesaid additional documents comprising of Affidavit and news paper publications, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court deserve to be set aside and the suit filed by the appellant – plaintiff deserves to be decreed in his favour.

¶38

In the result, I pass the following:-

¶39

ORDER

¶40

(i) Appeal is hereby allowed .

¶41

(ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 24.06.2023

¶42

passed in O.S.No.1266/2023 by the VIII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside.

¶43

¶44

NC: 2023:KHC:41330 RFA No. 1877 of 2023

¶45

(iii) The suit of the appellant – plaintiff is decreed as sought for by him.

¶46

(iv) Registry is directed to draw decree accordingly.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

DHA/SRL

Sri. Nandan, v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Nandan, v. the Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Mohammed Haneef @ Illyaz Vs Sri G M Malik

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay Vs the State of Karnataka

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Vs Sri. G Prem Kumar

Rajalakshmamma Vs D L Jagadeesh

Sri K N Ravishankar Vs Smt Roopa K N

Shri. Kailashchandra Kasturilal Sodhi Vs M/S. Varuna Agencies