Delhi District Court
R/O Vpo Qutab Garh vs The State on 23 October, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH. SUMIT DASS, ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL
JUDGE (NORTH WEST) ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
Suit No. 140/12.
Shri. Ajit Singh
S/o Late Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar
R/o VPO Qutab Garh, Delhi39 ....Plaintiff.
Versus
The State, NCT Delhi Govt.
Through Executive Magistrate/
Tehsildar (SV) Kanjhawala, Delhi81 ....Defendant.
Date of Institution: 04.07.2012.
Date of arguments: 10.10.2013.
Date of Judgment: 23.10.2013.
Suit No. 140/12. 1/7
Ajit Singh v. State.
SUIT FOR DECLARATION IN TERMS OF SECTION 107 AND 108 OF
INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872
J U D G M E N T:
1. In short facts are as under:
Plaintiff has sought for a declaration that his father Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar was missing since 22.06.2003 and in this regard report was lodged in PS Kanjhawala vide DD no. 22A dated 03.07.2003. Publication was carried out in the newspaper 'Punjab Kesari' on 25.09.2003 also in this respect. Unfortunately, there was no clue of Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar neither any information was received pertaining to his whereabouts. Accordingly, plaintiff presented an application before the Deputy Commissioner seeking a declaration in this regard that his father was missing/ no one had heard of him since the last 7 years preceding the presentment of the application. The said representation was however negated relying upon a circular dated 09.03.2011 bearing No. F.1/Misc./2011/196 that SDM/ Revenue Authorities are not civil court who can pass a declaratory Suit No. 140/12. 2/7 Ajit Singh v. State.
decree or order of similar effect. Consequently, plaintiff has filed the instant suit seeking the declaratory relief as mentioned.
2. Notice was issued to the State as well as to the general public at large vide publication in daily newspaper 'Rashtriya Sahara' dated 08.08.2012. State has, however, filed its no objections in this regard.
3. During the course of proceedings, plaintiff thought it fit that all the LR's of Late Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar be joined as coplaintiffs and accordingly they were also permitted to be joined as coplaintiffs vide order dated 16.08.2013 to join the proceedings. All of the witnesses have deposed in one voice that Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar has not been heard of since 22.06.2003. The relief stated in the suit was sought by the entire body of plaintiffs and the documents placed on record were duly proved.
PW2 was Head Constable Joginder Singh who had proved the DD no. 20/A as Ex. PW2/1. I am not in detail reproducing the contents of the evidence for the reason that there is no one to object to the aforesaid case. Suit No. 140/12. 3/7 Ajit Singh v. State.
4. Heard ld. counsel for the plaintiff.
5. Birth as well as death both particularly the date whereof has a sufficiently large number of consequences which are of civil in nature and encompasses a number of facets of one's life. To put it pithly, it may in a manner determine the destiny of a person particularly birth, however, death also affect a large number of persons as upon that event the property rights devolves/ succession opens up and that particular event the revenue or municipal authorities takes as the triggering point to cause change(s) in their records. Normally, there is no dispute what so ever as such except in few cases where the persons are missing or have not been heard of. Whether they have to be treated as alive or treated as dead so that succession rights open up and the properties have to be inherited is the vexed question. It is not that the property rights have to be tied up for ever though the owner or whose possessory rights are there is not present in this world to exercise such rights. In this regard, the rules of evidence u/s 107 & 108 of the Indian Evidence Act though despite being rules of evidence have been pressed in service to seek a declaratory relief. The said rules prescribe a principle of evidence, section Suit No. 140/12. 4/7 Ajit Singh v. State.
108 of the Indian Evidence Act states that the burden is upon the person who pleads that a person is alive and has not been heard of for the last seven years is upon one who positively contends the same. This aspect of leading evidence is only in reference to the proceedings or question in which the substantial issue is whether a man is alive or not. In the present proceedings no one has has come forth with any specific plea in this regard. All the family members have spoken in one voice that Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar is missing since 22.06.2003 and his whereabouts are not known. There is also no objection filed by the authorities i.e. State and Police. Police has also not pointed out anything to the contrary though they were informed about the missing of said Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar. Consequently, in absence of there being any contrary assertion to the said effect and in view of the principle incorporated under section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act coupled with the fact that the date of death along with it carries a large number of logical consequences or events and affects the rights of the parties it is imperative that the state particularly the recording machinery about the factum of death should act upon such supposition that the missing person Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar has not been heard off since seven years and no one Suit No. 140/12. 5/7 Ajit Singh v. State.
has claimed to the contrary and therefore can proceed to issue a death certificate in this regard.
Accordingly, a decree of declaration is passed in favour of the plaintiff thereby directing that Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar is deemed to have died/ has not been heard of since seven years. Consequently, State authorities to prepare a death certificate and record this fact. It be also stated on the death certificate that the issuance of death certificate is as per the orders passed by this court. No order as to costs.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court (Sumit Dass)
on 23.10.2013. ACJCUMARC NORTHWEST
This judgment contains 6 pages ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
& each page has been signed by me.
Suit No. 140/12. 6/7
Ajit Singh v. State.
Suit No. 140/12.
23.10.2013.
Present: Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff.
Matter was posted for orders.
Vide separate judgment of even date, a decree of declaration is passed in favour of the plaintiff thereby directing that Sh. Ram Kanwar @ Ram Kumar is deemed to have died/ has not been heard of since seven years. Consequently, State authorities to prepare a death certificate and record this fact. It be also stated on the death certificate that the issuance of death certificate is as per the orders passed by this court. No order as to costs.
Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to Record Room.
(Sumit Dass) ACJcumARC (North West) Rohini Courts, Delhi/23.10.2013.
Suit No. 140/12. 7/7 Ajit Singh v. State.