The examples you mentioned are very interesting cases too, and they are related to the British's initial days in India.
- 'Baroda' was not a 'wrong pronunciation' of Vadodara. Vadodara itself is corruption of the word 'Vatodar' (related to the Banyan trees abundant in the region) and historically the city was known as Chandanavati and later as Virkshetra. Though the name 'Vadodara' popped up in some works of poetry, the state was never ruled under that name. The exact evolution of the name is hard to track, but many of the early Dutch and British visitors referred to the place as 'Brodera'. It is from this that the name 'Baroda' was derived.
-...
more...

During the era of the East India Company, with the company being based out of Bengla, there was a distinct Bengali influence in the way the British referred to places in other parts of the country. Having the letter 'B' instead of a 'V' sound, the predominance of the 'o' instead of 'u' (Again, Cawnpore and Bangalore) were some of the many ways in which this influence was visible.

Names are changed to suit 'ruler' needs, 'society' needs
Recently one Railway station named Mughal Sarai is changed to Pandit Dindayal Upadhyay as decided by Govt.
and when social practice prevails they change name of Girl after marriage.
I have seen in my home itself. My mother name was too was changed though maintained Zodiac sign. And this change of name was always resisted...
more...

by my mother whenever she had chance.
Reason behind such practices is to create a 'new identity' in line with current time/situation/situation whatever you may call.

Thanks for the positive response.
One more thing that these people are missing, is the concept of 'original names'. Names evolve over time. Depending on the rulers and Socio-cultural conditions, names evolve over time. For example, the claim that 'Chennai' is the original name and not Madras. Over centuries, the place would have had many names. It's just that Chennai is historically the most recent one of those that we are familiar with.
Similarly, the claim that 'Bengaluru' is the original name...
more...

too does not hold up. That is only accurate till about 200-300 years ago. Before that, for centuries, the region was under various rulers and the name would have been different. Clamoring for a 'original name' is pointless as one would have to go back to ancient scriptures and put those names if they really want to be accurate.
It would be a really good start if people started referring to the literature from the 1800's or early 1900's. These books, written 200 years ago, present a different picture and provide details that we now are not even aware of, regarding many places and their histories. If the Brits were good at anything, that was maintaining impeccable historical records of each and every place that was under their rule. Our perspectives will change once we incorporate their knowledge.