- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2191 OF 2024 (DEC) BETWEEN: SMT VANI KISHORE, W/O KISHORE N., AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/A NO.1135, 2ND FLOOR, 26TH B MAIN, JAYANAGAR 9TH BLOCK, BENGALURU - 560 069. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SUHAS H S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, M. S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR BEEDI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION BOARD BY ITS SECRETARY, 6TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 002. 3. DEPARTMENT OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, BY ITS DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PRE-UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, BENGALURU - 560 002. 4. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, MYSORE ROAD, JNANA BHARATHI, BENGALURU - 560 056. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MILIND DANGE., AGA) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.07.2024 PASSED IN OS.NO.2745/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellant-plaintiff filed a suit seeking a declaration that her name be recorded as ‘Vani Kishore’ in place of the name presently appearing in her records as ‘Vasavi S.’ and for consequential direction to carry out the change in all relevant public and educational records. 2. The Trial Court dismissed the suit holding that ‘no sufficient grounds’ were made out to change the name from ‘Vasavi S.’ to ‘Vani Kishore’. Aggrieved, the plaintiff has preferred this appeal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the right to control one’s name and identity flows from Article 21 of the Constitution, a person may change his name without furnishing reasons, subject only to bonafides and the absence of any legal prohibition. 3.1 Reliance is placed on : i. Government of Karnataka Circular dated 06.03.1998 which recognizes that the authorities may give effect to a change of name when supported by a decree of competent Civil Court; and ii. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court’s decision in the case of Beena .N Vs. The Chief Secretary and Another1 (Beena .N), wherein a similar declaration and direction were granted. 1 RFA No.1570/2007 D.D 23.02.2023 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 4. A suit for declaration under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (‘Specific Relief Act’ for short), is a recognized mode to establish civil status/identity particulars where public authorities are bound to act on such degrees. The circular by the Government of Karnataka dated 06.03.1998 states that they would entertain the change of name request if it is accompanied by a decree of the competent Court. The Co-Ordinate Bench in Beena .N’s case applied this position and directed consequential corrections. In the present case, the Trial Court rejected the claim for want of sufficient grounds, appearing to treat the astrological basis as inadequate, that approach is misdirected. The existence or strength of personal reasons is not a legal touchstone. The Court’s role is to verify: a. Identity of the appellant; b. Absence of fraud/illegality/evasion; c. Compliance with procedural safeguards. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 Once these are satisfied, denial of relief invades the appellant’s right under Article 21 of the Constitution. 5. Given the appellant’s current records at Exs.P1 to P22 show that the name of the appellant-plaintiff is ‘Vasavi S.’ given to her by her parents at the time of admitting to the school, the change of name in the present case would not prejudice anybody, much less the State. In the circumstances, the judgment and decree of the Trial Court needs to be set aside and the appellant’s choice to be known as ‘Vani Kishore’ is a legitimate exercise of her constitutional right. There being no allegation of fraud or prejudice to the third party, and the change being through standard safeguards, the impugned dismissal of the suit cannot be sustained and this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The regular first appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment and decree dated 11.07.2024 passed in O.S.No.2745/2021 on the file of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32390 RFA No. 2191 of 2024 XXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru is hereby set aside. iii. The suit of the plaintiff in O.S.No.2745/2021 is decreed and it is hereby declared that her name would be ‘Vani Kishore’ instead of ‘Vasavi S.’ and as a consequence, necessary changes shall be made in all her educational records by the educational authorities. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20