Allowed

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC16 Nov 2023RFA/877/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This regular first appeal set aside the Trial Court's dismissal of a suit for declaring a name change of a minor girl. The High Court found the Trial Court misdirected in ignoring uncontroverted material establishing that all necessary steps, including affidavit and newspaper publications, were taken based on astrological advice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment and decree dismissing the suit are set aside; the suit is decreed as sought for by the appellant.

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay Vs the State of Karnataka — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.877 OF 2023 (DEC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MS. HITHA DHANANJAY D/O MR DHANANJAY N ANCHAN AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS

¶8

SINCE MINOR RERPESENTED BY HER NATURAL GUARDIAN (FATHER) MR DHANANJAY N ANCHAN AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O NARAYAN T ANCHAN

¶9

BOTH RESIDING AT NO.858 7^TH CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK KRS GOWDA EXTENSION HMT LAYOUT BENGALURU-560 073.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. HARSH S PAREKH, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE

¶16

BENGALURU-560 002.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶19

BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER (BENGALURU NORTH 2) 18^TH CROSS ROAD MALLESHWARAM

¶20

BENGALURU-560012.

¶21

POORNAPRAJNA EDUCATION CENTRE SADASHIVANAGAR ARAMANE NAGAR BENGALURU-560 080.

¶22

THE PRINCIPAL POORNAPRAJNA EDUCATION CENTRE SADASHIVANAGAR ARAMANE NAGAR BENGALURU-560 080.

¶23

THE COMMISIONER FOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION NEW PUBLIC OFFICES NRUPATHUNGA ROAD

¶24

BENGALURU-560 001.

¶25

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS BENGALURU NORTH DISTRICT K G ROAD

¶26

BENGALURU-560 002.

¶27

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF REGISTRAR GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA DIRECTORATE OF ECONOMIC AND STATISTICS 7^TH FLOOR, VISHVESHWARAYA MAIN TOWER B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI ROAD

¶28

BENGALURU-560 001.

¶29

KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION EXAMINATION BOARD 6^TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU -560 003.

¶30

CHIEF PASSPORT OFFICER (CPO) PSP DIVISION MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS ROOM NO.8, PATIALA HOUSE TILAK MARG, NEW DELHI-110001

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶33

REGIONAL OFFICE AT 8^TH BLOCK 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 095.

¶34

UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF INDIA (UIDAI) REGIONAL OFFICE AT KHANIJA BHAVAN NO.49, 3^RD FLOOR, SOUTH WING RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU-560 001.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R-1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9; SRI. KUMAR M.N., CGSC FOR R-10 & R-11; SRI. PARAMESHWARAPPA C.T., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 R-4 & R-5 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶37

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.03.2023 PASSED IN OS NO.4901/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION.

¶38

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

¶39

JUDGMENT

¶40

This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 02.03.2023 passed in O.S.No.4901/2022 by the VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the said suit filed by the appellant – plaintiff for declaration of her name as ‘Nitika Dhananjay Gowda’ in place of ‘Hitha Dhananjay / Hitha D.A.’ in the records of her school, Government authorities, etc., and for consequential mandatory injunction directing the respondents –

¶41

¶42

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶43

defendants to enter the plaintiff’s name in the records was dismissed by the Trial Court.

¶44

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶45

The material on record discloses that the appellant – plaintiff (represented by her natural guardian (father)) instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration and mandatory injunction interalia contending that his daughter’s original name was ‘Hitha Dhananjay / Hitha D.A.’ and the same was entered in all her records at school, Government authorities, etc., Subsequently, due to health reasons, based on the advise of Numerologist and Astrologer, the parents of the plaintiff intended to change their daughter’s name and hence, father of the plaintiff swore to an affidavit on 07.04.2022 followed by two Newspaper publications in ‘Vartha Bharathi’ and ‘The New Indian Express’ on 09.04.2022 and 12.04.2022, respectively and pursuant thereto, the parents of the plaintiff approached the respondents seeking change of their daughter’s name and entering her daughter’s name viz., ‘Nitika Dhananjay Gowda’ in the records and since their requests were not complied with by the

¶46

¶47

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶48

respondents, the appellant instituted the aforesaid suit before the trial Court.

¶49

In the suit, the defendants 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 and 9 filed their written statement and during trial, the father of the plaintiff examined himself as PW1 and exhibits P1 to P8 were marked while defendants did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence, pursuant to which, 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.

¶50

A perusal of the material on record including the impugned judgment and decree will clearly indicate that the Trial Court failed to consider and appreciate the unimpeached, uncontroverted and unchallenged material on record produced by the appellant – plaintiff which clearly established that while her original name was ‘Hitha Dhananjay / Hitha D.A.’ and due to health reasons, based on the advise of Numerologist and Astrologer, the parents of the plaintiff intended to change their daughter’s name by taking all necessary steps to get her daughter’s name changed to

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:41104 RFA No. 877 of 2023

¶53

‘Nitika Dhananjay Gowda’ by swearing to an affidavit on 07.04.2022, issuing Newspaper publications dated 09.04.2022 and 12.04.2022, etc., as borne out from the material on record. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the Trial Court completely misdirected itself in dismissing the suit by assigning wholly untenable reasons which are contrary to the material on record and consequently, 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 her favour.

¶54

In the result, I pass the following:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

(i) Appeal is hereby allowed .

¶57

(ii) Impugned judgment and decree dated 02.03.2023 passed in O.S.No.4901/2022 by the VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, is hereby set aside

¶58

(iii) The suit of the appellant – plaintiff is decreed as sought for by her. (iv) Registry is directed to draw decree accordingly.

¶59

DHA / SV; List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

¶60

Sd/JUDGE

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms. Hitha Dhananjay v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Sreerama Vs Sri R Narayanappa

Smt. Ranjitha Vs Sreekanth

Jayanth Govind Singh Vs Karnataka Secondary Education

N. Chandrashekar Vs S. Dharnesh

Ravichandran R Vs Chitralekha

Mr Mohammed Haneef @ Illyaz Vs Sri G M Malik