- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10477 RFA No. 1464 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1464 OF 2022 (DEC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. M PAVAN KALYAN S/O SRI MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT NO.2, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NARAYANA RAO COLONY BANGALORE – 560 021. 2. SRI MANJUNATHA S/O SRI. VIJAY RAJ AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO.2, 1ST MAIN ROAD, NARAYANA RAO COLONY BANGALORE – 560 021. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K B NAVEEN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING, 7TH FLOOR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560 001. 3. BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER OFFICE AT 18TH CROSS, NEAR CENTRE MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE – 560 003. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10477 RFA No. 1464 of 2022 4. THE DIRECTOR SSLC BOARD KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION EXAMINATION BOARD, 6TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE – 560 003. 5. THE HEAD MASTER GANDHI VIDYASHALA HIGH SCHOOL SREERAMPURAM BANGALORE – 560 021. 6. THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R-1 TO R-4 & R-6; R-3 & R-5 ARE SERVED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.05.2022 PASSED IN OS NO.5794/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION. 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 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 23.05.2022 passed in O.S.No.5794/2021 by the VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the said suit filed by the appellants – plaintiffs against the respondents – defendants for declaration that the name of the 1st plaintiff’s father - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10477 RFA No. 1464 of 2022 was ‘Manjunatha’ instead of ‘Murthy S.’ and for mandatory injunction directing the respondents to make necessary corrections in the Marks Cards, Certificates etc., issued by the respondents in favour of the 1st appellant – 1st plaintiff and for other reliefs was dismissed by the Trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 and 6 and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record discloses that the appellants – plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit interalia contending that 1st appellant’s – 1st plaintiff’s father’s name was actually ‘Manjunatha’ and due to oversight and inadvertence and on account of clerical / typographical errors, it was shown as ‘Murthy S’ instead of ‘Manjunatha’ in the Marks Cards, Certificates and other documents of the 1st plaintiff and despite the request made by the appellants to the respondents to change the father’s name of 1st appellant – 1st plaintiff as ‘Manjunatha’ instead of ‘Murthy S.’ was not complied with by the respondents, despite issuance of legal notice dated 28.07.2021, the plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the defendants before the Trial Court. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10477 RFA No. 1464 of 2022 4. The respondents 1 to 6 – defendants 1 to 6 did not enter appearance and hence, they were placed ex-parte. Appellants – plaintiffs examined themselves as PW-1 and PW-2 and documentary evidence at Exhibits P1 to P6 were marked. The Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and decree dismissing the suit filed by the appellants, who is before this Court by way of the present appeal. 5. The material on record clearly establishes that apart from the fact that the pleadings and evidence adduced by the appellants – plaintiffs had remained unimpeached, uncontroverted and unchallenged by the respondents – defendants, who had not appeared and adduced any evidence to rebut the claim of the appellants, the cumulative effect of the evidence adduced by the appellants, is sufficient to indicate that the actual name of the 1st appellant’s father was ‘Manjunatha’ and not ‘Murthy S’ as wrongly and incorrectly stated in the Certificates, Marks Cards, etc., of the 1st appellant. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the Trial Court clearly fell in error in dismissing the suit filed by the appellants by passing the impugned judgment and decree which deserves to be set aside by this Court in the present appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10477 RFA No. 1464 of 2022 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 23.05.2022 passed in O.S.No.5794/2021 on the file of the VII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru (CCH-19) is hereby set aside. (iii) The suit is hereby decreed as prayed for by the appellants. SD/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29