Delhi District Court
Raj Rani Sharma vs . State Of Nct on 11 September, 2012
Raj Rani Sharma Vs. State of NCT
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHREYA ARORA, CIVIL JUDGE1,
ROOM NO. 1, SAKET COURTS, SOUTH DISTRICT, NEW DELHI
In the matter of:
Suit No. 60/11
Case ID No. 02406C0005542011
Raj Rani Sharma
W/o Late Sh. S. P. Sharma
R/o J311, Sarita Vihar,
New Delhi110 076.
.................Plaintiff
VERSUS
State of NCT of Delhi
Through its Secretary
Delhi.
..............Defendant
Date of Institution : 12.01.2011
Date of reserving the Judgment : 17.08.2012
Date of pronouncement : 11.09.2012
Decision : Decreed
SUIT FOR DECLARATION
JUDGMENT
1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking declaration of death of her son Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma.
2. It is the case of the plaintiff that she is a 65 year old widow who was residing with her son Rajnish Kumar Sharma and her daughterinlaw Smt. Shashi Sharma at J303, Sarita Vihar, Suit No. 60/11 Page 1 of 4 Raj Rani Sharma Vs. State of NCT New Delhi since 1998. It is averred that on 04.09.2002, her son and daughterinlaw left for Badrinath and on 05.09.2002 both of them went to Bhim Pool near Village Mana, Badrinath where when both of them were watching the flow of the river Saraswati, son of the plaintiff slipped into the river Saraswati. It is further averred that the daughterin law of the plaintiff made efforts to rescue the son of the plaintiff, however, he was not rescued even with the help of the villagers from nearby village Mana. Thereupon the matter was reported to the local police. Local police made necessary search to trace out Sh. Rajnish Kumar Sharma dead or alive, but on their failure, they issued certificates on 05.09.2002 and 08.09.2002, thereby declaring him dead.
3. It is the grievance of the plaintiff that the plaintiff at that time was at her house when she learnt about the death of her son and kept on waiting for more than eight years with the hope that he would survive. It is stated that the plaintiff has not heard anything about her son from the persons who could have known about him being alive for more than 8 years. The daughterinlaw of the plaintiff also assuming her husband to be dead left the plaintiff in the year 2003 for pursuing her life. Hence, the plaintiff has prayed that Sh. Rajnish Kumar Sharma may be declared dead and a death certificate pertaining to his death may be issued by the concerned authorities.
4. Summons were issued to the defendant. Despite service none appeared for the defendant and were accordingly proceeded exparte.
Suit No. 60/11 Page 2 of 4Raj Rani Sharma Vs. State of NCT
5. Plaintiff has led exparte evidence. Plaintiff have examined herself as PW1 and have deposed on lines of the plaint. PW1 marked copy of the ration card and driving licence of Sh. Rajnish Kumar Sharma as Mark PW1/1 and Mark PW1/2, copies of the shares and dividends in the name of Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma as Mark PW1/3, copy of the complaint dated 05.09.2002 as Mark PW1/4, copy of the death certificates issued by police as Mark PW1/5 and MarkPW1/6, respectively. Legal Notice as Ex.PW1/7 and postal receipt as Ex.PW1/8. The plaintiff also examined SI Chander Mohan Singh Negi, Station Officer, P.S. Badrinath as PW2 who has exhibited certificates dated 05.09.2002 as Ex.PW2/2 and 08.09.2002 as Ex.PW2/1. It is deposed that the said certificates were issued by P.S. Badrinath, District Chamoli, Ex.PW2/1 was certified by then Station Officer Mr. Ram Kumar Singh and Ex.PW2/2 was certified by then Station Officer Mr. Naveen Chand Joshi and they are true and genuine.
6. The plaintiff has proved the untraceable report as Ex.PW2/1 and Ex.PW2/2. PW1 has also deposed through her affidavit that she has not seen or heard of Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma since more than 8 years. It is clear from the statement of the witnesses as well as documents Ex.PW2/1 and Ex.PW2/2 that Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma is missing since 05.09.2002 and nothing has been brought on record contrary to the testimony of PW1 and PW2. As per Section 108 of the Evidence Act, 1872 the question whether a man is alive or dead is to be proved when he is not heard of for more than 7 years by those Suit No. 60/11 Page 3 of 4 Raj Rani Sharma Vs. State of NCT who would have naturally heard of him if he had been alive. The burden of proving that he is alive is shifted to a person who affirms it. From the perusal of the evidence on record, it has been proved by the plaintiff that they have not heard of Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma as alive and have not seen him for more than 8 years. The testimony of PW1 and PW2 has gone unrebutted. Accordingly, there is no reason to disbelieve the unrebutted testimony of PW1 and PW2 or to doubt the authenticity and veracity of the documents exhibited. Keeping in view the presumption under Section 108 of the Evidence Act, 1872 the plaintiff is able to establish her case that Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma is not seen or heard of for more than eight years and is missing since 05.09.2002.
7. In the facts and circumstances, the present suit is hereby decreed in favour of the plaintiff and son of the plaintiff Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma is declared dead. Let certificate of death be issued by the concerned authority on proper application, being submitted by the plaintiff mentioning the date of death of Mr. Rajnish Kumar Sharma as 05.09.2009. Parties to bear their own costs.
8. Decree sheet be drawn accordingly. Thereafter, file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open (SHREYA ARORA)
Court on 11.09.2012 CIVIL JUDGE1 (SOUTH DISTRICT)
(Judgment contains 4 pages) SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
Suit No. 60/11 Page 4 of 4