- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.1767 OF 2023 (DEC/INJ) BETWEEN: NAMAN NAIKA. A AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, MINOR, REP. BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND M. ANNAPPA NAIKA, R/AT NEELADRI HOUSE, NEAR BHUVANENDRA COLLEGE, KARKALA KASABA VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK-574 104. …APPELLANT (BY SRI ANIKETH FOR SRI SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, UDUPI DISTRICT, RAJATADRI, MANIPAL-576 104. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS UDUPI JILLA PANCHAYATH, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, JILLA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, RAJATHADRI, MANIPAL-576 104. 3. THE HEAD MASTER GOVT. HIGHER PRIMARY SCHOOL, DODDABUKKA SAGARA, BISALEHALLI POST, KADOOR TALUK, CHIKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 548. Digitally signed by R MANJUNATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 4. THE HEAD MASTER SUNDAR PURANIK MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, PERVAJE, BHUVANENDRA COLLEGE ROAD, KARKALA, KASABA VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK-574 104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA SOODI, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 01.04.2023 PASSED IN R.A.NO.4/2022 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, KARKALA, UDUPI, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 03.01.2022 PASSED IN O.S.NO.101/2019 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KARKALA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri B.S. Sachin, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri GopalKrishna Soodi, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. Unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant, challenging the validity of the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.101/2019, confirmed in R.A.No.4/2022, whereby suit of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 the plaintiff seeking declaration of his name to be changed and consequential reliefs came to be dismissed. 3. Facts in the nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under: 4. Naman Naika A., who is aged about 15 years, represented by his next friend M. Annappa Naika, filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction contending that plaintiff is studying in tenth standard in defendant No.4 school and he has been in care and custody of natural guardian-father. Plaintiff is a Hindu by birth and has been brought up as Hindu. His parents are Hindus and he belongs to Lambani Scheduled Caste Community and Caste. 5. It is also contended that correct name of the plaintiff’s father is Annappa Naika M., which is supported by necessary documents, like voter ID card, Aadhaar card and other Government documents. Plaintiff’s father is originally resident of Doddabukka Sagara, Kadoor Taluk, Chikkamagaluru District and married to Smt.Geetha Bai @ Haseena @ Asha, who was originally a Muslim lady. 6. It is contended that after the marriage, said Geetha Bai @ Haseena @ Asha embraced Hinduism and assumed the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 Hindu name as Geetha Bai and has been living with the father of the plaintiff as his wife. Out of their wedlock, they got two children. They were born and brought up as Hindus. 7. Further, it is contended that plaintiff was born on 13.06.2003 and at the time of birth of the plaintiff, father and his wife were residing in the house of the wife’s parents at Kadoor Taluk, Chikkamagaluru District for some time. At that juncture, during the absence of the father of the plaintiff, plaintiff was admitted to defendant No.3 school by his grandmother Smt. Khurshid Bi and at that juncture, the name of the plaintiff was given as Shiyaz instead of Naman Naika. 8. It is also contended that affectionately, the grandmother of the plaintiff was calling father of the plaintiff as Khaleel and the father name was given as Khaleel at the time of admission of the plaintiff to school, under bona fide and inadvertent mistake forgetting that the plaintiff is a Hindu and his father is also a Hindu, bearing Hindu name. 9. Suit was resisted by defendant No.2 and other defendants, denying the plea of the plaintiff. Suit on contest came to be dismissed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 10. Being aggrieved by the same, plaintiff filed an appeal before the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.4/2022. 11. Learned Judge in the First Appellate Court, after securing the records, heard the arguments of the parties, re- appreciated the material on record, both on legal and factual aspects and dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff and confirmed the dismissal of the suit. 12. Being further aggrieved by the same, plaintiff is before this Court in this appeal on the following grounds and substantial questions of law:  The impugned judgment and decree passed by the court below is unjust, opposed to law, contrary to the pleadings and evidence placed on record by the parties. Under Such circumstances the impugned judgment and decree passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.  The court below had committed an error while passing the impugned judgment and decree to the extent under challenge which is in consideration of irrelevant material placed on record by the respondents and non consideration of real material placed on record by the appellant. Under such circumstances the impugned judgment and decree passed by the courts below are liable to be set aside.  The court below has committed an error in disbelieving the evidence adduced by the appellant and passing the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 judgment based on misconception of real point in controversy in the case and which is opposed to the case set up by the appellant in whose favor it was drawn. Under such circumstances the impugned judgment passed by the courts below are liable to be set aside.  The impugned judgment passed by the appellate court is contrary to pleadings and evidence in the case, contrary to the facts found or is in consistent with the statement of reasons therefore, the judgment based on quaint reasoning or is vague, indefinite ambiguous, arbitrary, vitiated by prejudice, based on distorted view of the evidence, based on surmises or extraneous consideration no reasons have been given for findings material facts and evidence placed by the appellant have been ignored in arriving at the conclusion of fact. Under such circumstances the impugned judgment passed by the courts below are liable to be set aside.  The findings arrived against the appellant by the courts below is vitiated by error of law of substantial nature as it was based on no evidence and same is based on simple conjectures and surmise and on inadmissible piece of document and as such vitiated by error of law. Under such circumstances the impugned judgment passed by the courts below are liable to be set aside. This judgment suffers from total ignorance of law of stare decisis, sub- silentio and resultant per-incurium.  The courts below had committed an error in not re appreciating the evidence in proper perspective under such circumstances the impugned judgment passed by the courts below are liable to be set aside. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023  The impugned judgment and decree passed by the court below is not in accordance with law and the same is contrary to the provision of relevant laws and precedents applicable to the case.  The impugned judgment & decree of the Trial Court is, unjust and unsustainable either in law or on facts of the case.  The appellant has proved the case with preponderance of probability, however the trial court has put undue burden of proof on the appellant.  The trial court has erred in not considering the admissibility in evidence, scope and evidentiary value of materials placed on record by the appellant  The courts below have erred in holding that the appellant failed to prove that his and his father's names are wrongly entered in school records as Shiyaz and Khalees instead of Naman Naika A and Annappa Naika M respectively, under such circumstance the impugned orders are liable to be set aside  The courts below erred in concurrently erred in holding that the suit is hit by non-joinder on necessary parties without appreciating the real issue in the Lis.  Viewed from any angle, the impugned judgement and decree passed by the Court below is error apparent on the face of the record. Contrary to the law and evidence, material placed on record by the appellant. Hence, the same is liable to be set aside”. “SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW ARISE FOR THE CONSIDERATION ARE AS FOLLOWS: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 a) Whether the Courts below are justified in dismissing the suit of the plaintiff in consideration of irrelevant material and in consideration of evidence and relevant materials placed on record by the appellant? b) Whether the judgment and decree of the courts below are perverse for having misread the evidence?” 13. Learned counsel for the appellant reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum vehemently contended that due to inadvertent mistake of the grandmother of the plaintiff, plaintiff is suffering on account of denial of all benefits. Therefore, his name is to be changed as Naman Naika instead of Shiyaz and sought for allowing the appeal. 14. Per contra, Sri Gopalkrishna Soodi, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the appeal grounds and supports the impugned judgments. 15. Having heard the arguments of both sides this Court perused the material on record. 16. On such perusal of the material, it is crystal clear that the school records contain the name of the plaintiff as Shiyaz. Not only the name of the boy is given as Shiyaz, but also his father's name is given as Khaleel instead of Annappa Naika. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 17. It is the make believe story of the plaintiff that the mother of the plaintiff embraced the Hinduism. No document is produced to establish the same. In fact, she has got two alias names apart from Geetha Bai. Her name is Haseena and after embracing Hinduism, she is called as Geetha Bai. If that is so, why she had the name of Asha is not explained by the plaintiff. 18. Fact remains that it is an inter-religion marriage and nowhere got registered. Birth certificate contains the name as Naman Naika of the plaintiff. If it is so, what prevented the grandmother of the plaintiff to furnish the birth certificate and enter the name as Naman Naika instead of Shiyaz though Ex.P.13 in Ex.P.13 it is mentioned as Naman Naika. 19. Moreover, there is no matter on record placed by the plaintiff to show that though the name of plaintiff is Shiyaz, he had the benefit that is available to Lambani community, when he pursued the education from first standard to ninth standard. 20. Taking note of these aspects of the matter, dismissal of the suit by the trial Court, confirmed by the First Appellate Court by supplying sound and logical reasons does not require to be re-appreciated, having regard to the scope of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35453 RSA No. 1767 of 2023 the appeal under Section 100 CPC. No legal right of the plaintiff is at jeopardy, which requires to be considered in the second appeal. Accordingly, the following: ORDER Appeal is meritless and hereby dismissed. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR