It’s not uncommon for couples to argue over naming their baby, but rarely does it end up in court.
But a couple from the southern Indian state of Karnataka had to resort to court intervention after a three-year dispute over their son’s name.
In fact, the argument had gotten so bad that the couple was seeking a divorce.
It all started in 2021 when the woman – whose name is not disclosed – gave birth to a boy and went home to her parents for a few weeks. In India, after the birth of a child, it is common for women to move to their parents’ house to rest and recuperate.
Normally the husband would come to take both the mother and the baby to his home.
But when the then 21-year-old woman refused to take the name her husband had chosen for their son, he became upset – and didn’t go to bring her back.
Instead, she chose the name Adi for her child – consisting of the first letter of her name and part of her husband’s name, according to Hunsur’s deputy public prosecutor Sowmya MN.
As months turned into years, the woman, who was still at her parents’ house, approached the magistrate court in Hunsur town in Mysuru district of the state, seeking financial support from her husband.
Her lawyer, Mr Harish, told BBC Hindi that the dispute had now escalated to the point where she was seeking a divorce.
“She wanted maintenance money since she is a housewife,” he said.
The case was initially filed in a local court but was later transferred to the People’s Court, also known as Lok Adalat, which handles cases that can be resolved through mediation.
Despite repeated suggestions from judges, the couple stood firm – until they finally agreed on a name chosen by the court.
The child is now called Aryavardhana, which means “of nobility,” says Ms. Sowmya.
The couple then exchanged garlands, a symbol of acceptance in Indian tradition, and apparently happily left to continue their marriage.
This is not the only time in recent years that an Indian court has had to intervene when it comes to naming a child.
Last September, a child in Kerala was denied entry to school after his birth certificate was found to be blank.
Her mother addressed the court and said she had tried to get the now four-year-old registered, but officials refused to fill out the form because the father – from whom she was separated – was not present.
In its order, the high court directed the birth registration office to adopt the name suggested by the mother and add the father’s name.
