IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1414 OF 2025 (DEC)

BETWEEN:

1. THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001.

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OFFICE, 12, DISPENSARY ROAD, KALASIPALYA, BENGALURU-560 002.

Dig itally 3. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA signed by KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION, PRAMILA G V EXAMINATION BOARD, Location: MALLESHWARAM CIRCLE, HIGH COURT MALLESHWARAM, OF BENGALURU-560 003.

KARNATAKA …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA PUJAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SHWETHA S., W/O. PUTTARAJU B. C., D/O. SHIVAMURTHY G C , AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.597, OLD NO.26, 14TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN, NEAR SUNDAR RESIDENCY, NEW BEL ROAD, DOLARS COLONY, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 094.

2. THE PRINCIPAL, MOTHER THERESA HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, NO.10, 1^ST MAIN, 6TH CROSS ROAD, SRI. KANTESHWARA NAGAR, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-560 096.

3. THE PRINCIPAL, M.E.S. KISHORE HIGH SCHOOL, 62, 10TH MAIN, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU-560 003.

4. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY, REP BY ITS REGISTRAR, DIRECTORS OF CORRESPONDENCE COURSES AND DISTANCE EDUCATION, CENTRAL COLLEGE CAMPUS, BENGALURU-560 001.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.M.MANJESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.08.2023 PASSED IN OS.NO.1300/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal by the defendants No.1, 2 and 5-State, is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 05.08.2023 in O.S. No.1300/2023 passed by the V Additional City Civil Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-13), whereby the said suit filed by the first respondent-plaintiff for the declaration that her name is Shwetha.S instead of Swetha.S and for further declaration that her date of birth was 10.06.1985 instead of 10.02.1985 was decreed by the Trial Court in favour of the first respondent-plaintiff against the appellants-defendants.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants-State and the learned counsel for the first respondent-plaintiff and perused the material placed on record.

3. In view of joint submissions made by both sides, notice to respondent No.2 to 4 is dispensed with and the matter is taken up for final disposal.

4. A perusal of the material on record would indicate that first respondent-plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit for declaration, mandatory injunction and other reliefs. It is the specific contention of the first respondent that her actual name was Shwetha.S instead of Swetha.S, which had erroneously/incorrectly appeared in the school records due to oversight and inadvertence. It is also contended by the first respondent-plaintiff that her actual date of birth was 10.06.1985 and not 10.02.1985, which was incorrectly entered in the school records. The said suit having been contested by the Appellants-State, the Trial Court proceeded to frame the following issues:

"1) Whether the plaintiff proves that her name is 'Shwetha.S' and not as 'Swetha.S'?

2) Whether plaintiff further proves that her correct date of birth is '10/06/1985' and not as '10/02/1985'?

3) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of declaration and mandatory injunction as sought for ?

4) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for suit reliefs as sought for ?

5) What order or decree?"

5. The plaintiff examined herself as PW-1 and documentary evidence at Exs.P1 to P9 were marked, whereas, the appellants-defendants did not adduce any oral or documentary evidence in support of their defence. The Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and decree upholding the claim of the plaintiff