Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
MHCC010124292019
Presented on : 29112019
Registered on : 16122019
Decided on : 28042023
Duration : 3 years, 4 months, 29 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
L.C. SUIT NO. 3365 of 2019
Exhibit No.:
Shri Hemant Sampat Gokhale
Age: 39, an adult, Indian Inhabitant of
Mumbai and residing at Room No. 4, 409,
4th floor, Ekta Society, Dr. Babasaheb
Ambedkar Nagar, Chembur,
Mumbai – 400 071 ....Plaintiff
VERSUS
1) The State of Maharashtra
The Secretary, Home Department,
Mantralaya, Govt. of Mharashtra, Mumbai.
2) The Chief Medical Officer
Matoshri Ramabai Ambedkar Maternity
Home, Chembur Naka
Chembur, Mumbai – 400 071.
3) Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation
of Greater Mumbai
M East Ward, BMC Ward Officer
Chembur Naka, Chembur
Mumbai – 400 072. .... Defendants
Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Bhandari for plaintiff.
Ld. Advocate Kapse for Defendant No.1.
Ld. Advocate Chandramore for Defendant No.2 and 3/MCGM.
-- 1 of 7 --
2 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
CORAM : K.P. KSHIRSAGAR
JUDGE, (C.R.NO.08)
DATE : 28th APRIL, 2023.
JUDGMENT
1) This is a suit for declaration that Gotpagar Hemant Sampat and
Hemant Sampat Gokhale are one and the same person i.e.
plaintiff Hemant Sampat Gokhale.
Plaintiff’s case in brief is as under:
2) Shri. Sampat Sakharam Gotpagar was his father and Smt. Vimal
Sampat Gotpagar was his mother. Mother of plaintiff was in
employment with defendant No.2. In the year 1999 mother of
plaintiff changed her name as Vimal Sampat Gokhale through
government gazette dtd.22/4/1999. Since then his mother is
known as Smt. Vimal Sampat Gokhale. Earlier plaintiff's name
was Hemant Sampat Gotpagar. However, as per government
gazette dtd.30/9/04 plaintiff also changed his name as Hemant
Sampat Gokhale. Hemant Sampat Gotpagar and Hemant Sampat
Gokhale are one and same person. However, in school leaving
certificate and other school testimonies name of plaintiff is
mentioned as Gotpagar Hemant Sampat and in his other
certificates like cast certificate, Aadhar card, election card,
marriage certificate his name is mentioned as Hemant Sampat
Gokhale. Due to above discrepancies in name in documents
defendant No.2 directed plaintiff to produce order of competent
court. Therefore, plaintiff has filed present suit for declaration
that Hemant Sampat Gotpagar and Hemant Sampat Gokhale are
one and same person i.e. plaintiff.
-- 2 of 7 --
3 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
3) Defendants failed to file their written statement. Therefore, suit
was proceeded without written statement of defendants.
4) Following points arise for determination and court has recorded
its decision thereon for the reasons stated there under:
SR.
NO.
POINTS DECISION
1) Whether plaintiff proves that, Gotpagar Hemant
Sampat and Hemant Sampat Gokhale are one and
same person i.e. plaintiff and now his name is
Hemant Sampat Gokhale?
Proved.
2) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief of
declaration as prayed?
Yes.
3) What Order and decree? As per final
order.
5) In order to prove his claim plaintiff examined himself as PW1 by
filing his affidavit in lieu of examination in chief vide Exh.2.
Plaintiff also relied upon documents like death certificate of
plaintiff's father Exh.5, copy of government gazette dtd.22/7/99
regarding change of name of plaintiff's mother Exh.6, original
school leaving certificate Exh.7, cast certificate of plaintiff Exh.8,
copy of government gazette dtd.30/9/04 regarding change of
plaintiff's name Exh.9, copy of letter issued by defendant No.2
Art.1, etc.
6) On the other hand, defendants did not adduce any oral or
documentary evidence. Heard arguments advanced by Ld.
-- 3 of 7 --
4 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
Advocate for plaintiff and Ld. Advocate for defendants.
REASONS
As to point No.1:
7) In respect of fact involved in this issue plaintiff vide his affidavit
in lieu of examination in chief Exh.2 has deposed in accordance
with his claim. P.W.1 categorically deposed that his name in
school leaving certificate and other school testimonies is recorded
as Gotpagar Hemant Sampat. PW1 deposed that as per
government gazette dtd.30/9/04 he changed his name as Hemant
Sampat Gokhale and his new name is Hemant Sampat Gokhale
and his new name is recorded in documents like cast certificate,
Aadhar card, election card, etc. PW1 deposed that Gotpagar
Hemant Sampat and Hemant Sampat Gokhale both are one and
same person. PW1 deposed that he has changed his name by
adopting proper procedure through government gazette.
Documents produced and proved by plaintiff corroborates
testimony of plaintiff. Testimony of plaintiff is not shaken in his
cross examination.
8) Moreover, it is also not defence of the defendants that Gotpagar
Hemant Sampat and Hemant Sampat Gokhale are not one and
same person and now name of plaintiff is not Hemant Sampat
Gokhale. Therefore, there is nothing on record so as to disbelieve
testimony of plaintiff.
9) Considering the matter on record and facts of case, court held
that plaintiff proved by preponderance of probabilities the fact
that Gotpagar Hemant Sampat and Hemant Sampat Gokhale are
one and same person i.e. plaintiff Hemant Sampat Gokhale.
-- 4 of 7 --
5 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
Therefore, point No.1 is answered in affirmative.
As to point No.2:
10) Admittedly, defendant No.2 informed plaintiff to obtain
order through competent court due to discrepancies in his name.
It means that defendant denied above claim of plaintiff about
discripancies in his name. As such it is clear that defendant No.2
is having knowledge of claim of plaintiff prior filing of present
suit and due to act of defendant No.2 plaintiff is compelled to file
present suit. Considering matter on record and above discussion
court held that plaintiff is entitled for declaration as prayed.
Therefore, point No.2 is answered in affirmative.
As to point No. 3:
11) In view of the affirmative decision as to point Nos. 1 and 2,
suit deserves to be decreed with cost. Therefore, Court proceeds
to pass the following order :
ORDER
1) Suit is decreed with costs.
2) It is hereby declared that, Mr. Hemant Sampat Gotpagar and
Hemant Sampat Gokhale are one and the same person. i.e.
Hemant Sampat Gokhale i.e. plaintiff.
3) Decree be drawn up accordingly.
4) Original documents be returned to the plaintiff after laps of
the appeal period as per rules.
(K.P.KSHIRSAGAR)
Judge
Dt.:28/4/2023. City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai
-- 5 of 7 --
6 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
Dictated on : 28/4/2023.
Typed on : 29/4/2023.
Draft given on: 29/4/2023.
Checked on:8/5/2023.
Corrected & Signed on:8/5/2023.
-- 6 of 7 --
7 SUIT NO.3365-2019 Judgment
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
10/5/2023 Mrs. S.A. Shekade
Name of the Judge (With Court room
no.)
SHRI K.P. Kshirsagar (Court Room
No.08)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
28/4/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
8/5/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 10/5/2023
-- 7 of 7 --