- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49245 RFA No. 1489 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1489 OF 2025 (DEC) BETWEEN: LIKITH C. AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, SON OF * CHETAN G. NO.29, INDRA COLONY ATTIGUPPE, VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 040. REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND GPA HOLDER N. ASHWINI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS W/O. * CHETAN G. NO.29, INDRA COLONY, ATTIGUPPE, VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE BENGALURU - 560 040. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.R. VISWANATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS PRAGATI HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR, 47-48 NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI - 110 019. 2. KARNATAKA PRE-UNIVSERSITY BOARD DEPARTMENT OF PRE- UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, * Corrected vide Court order dated 17.03.2026 Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49245 RFA No. 1489 of 2025 18TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 003. 3. HOLY ANGELS HIGH SCHOOL 4TH MAIN ROAD, HAMPI NAGAR, R.P.C. LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040. 4. ASC INDEPENDENT P.U.COLLEGE A-3, I MAIN ROAD, 6TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BANGALORE - 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH K., HCGP FOR R2 SRI. ROOPESH KUMAR N.R., ADVOCATE FOR R3 VIDE ORDER DATED 30.10.2025, NOTICE TO R1 D/W R4 - SERVED) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 27.02.2025 PASSED IN OS NO.521/2023 ON THE FILE OF XVI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT 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 27.02.2025 passed in O.S.No.521/2023 by the XVI Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby the said suit filed by the appellant – plaintiff against the respondents – - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49245 RFA No. 1489 of 2025 defendants for declaration that the name of the plaintiff’s father was * ‘Chetan G.’ instead of ‘Nagaraj S.’ and to incorporate initial “C” to the name of the plaintiff and for a direction to the respondents- defendants to make necessary corrections in the Marks Cards, Certificates etc., issued by the respondents in favour of the appellant – plaintiff and for other reliefs was dismissed by the trial Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned HCGP for 2nd respondent as well as learned counsel for 3rd respondent and perused the material on record. 3. The material on record discloses that the appellant – plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit interalia contending that his father’s name was actually * ‘Chetan G.’ and due to oversight and inadvertence and on account of clerical / typographical errors, it was shown as ‘Nagaraj S.’ instead of * ‘Chetan G.’ in the Marks Cards, Certificates and other documents of the plaintiff and since despite the request made by the appellant to the respondents to change his name as ‘Likith C. S/o * ‘Chetan G.’ was not complied * Corrected vide Court order dated 17.03.2026 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49245 RFA No. 1489 of 2025 with by the respondents, the plaintiff instituted the aforesaid suit against the defendants before the trial Court. 4. The plaintiff examined his mother as PW-1 and documentary evidence at Exs. P1 to P12 were marked. However, the respondents-defendants. Despite service of notice to the defendants-respondents, they did not appear before the trial court nor cross-examined PW-1 or adduced any oral or documentary evidence to rebut the claim of the plaintiff and they have been placed ex-parte. The trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned judgment and decree dismissing the suit filed by the appellant, 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 appellant – plaintiff had remained unimpeached, uncontroverted and unchallenged by the respondents – defendants, who had not adduced any evidence to rebut the claim of the appellant, the cumulative effect of the evidence adduced by the appellant is sufficient to indicate that the actual name of the appellant’s father was * ‘Chetan G.’ and not ‘Nagaraj S.’ as wrongly and incorrectly stated in the Certificates, Marks Cards etc., of the appellant. Under * Corrected vide Court order dated 17.03.2026 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49245 RFA No. 1489 of 2025 these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the trial Court clearly fell in error in dismissing the suit filed by the appellant by passing the impugned judgment and decree, which deserves to be set aside by this Court in the present appeal. 6. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Appeal is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and decree dated 27.02.2025 passed in O.S.No.521/2023 by the trial court is hereby set aside. (iii) The suit is hereby decreed as prayed for by the appellant. SD/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE YKL/SRL