Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Sri. R. Maruthi vs The Chief Secretary on 29 June, 2019

        IN THE COURT OF THE VII.ADDL.CITY CIVIL &
        SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH.No.19)

             Dated: This the 29th day of June 2019.

                              Present
                  Smt.M.LATHA KUMARI, M.A. LL.M.,
                  VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge,
                              Bengaluru.


                         O.S.NO.383/2018

    Plaintiffs:               1. Sri. R. MARUTHI,
                                 S/o Late T. Rangaswami,
                                 Aged about 65 years,

                              2. Sri M. KESHAVAMURTHY
                                 S/o Sri. R. Maruthi,
                                 Aged about 38 years,

                              3. Sri M. PUSHPAVATHI,
                                 D/o Sri. R. Maruthi,
                                 Aged about 34 years,

                                All are residing at No. 19,
                                1st Main Road, Opp: KTR
                                College, Hegganahalli,
                                Bangalore-560091.


                                (By Sri N. Anjan Gowda
                                 Adv.)
                         -Vs-

Defendant:               1.     THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
                                Government of Karnataka,
                                Vidhana Soudha, Dr.
                                Ambedkar Road, Bangalore-
                                560 001.

                         2.     THE COMMISSIONER OF
                                POLICE, (Law & Order),
                                    Infantry Road, Bengaluru-
                                   560 001.

                              3.   THE DEPUTY
                                   COMMISSIONER,
                                   Bengaluru Urban District,
                                   Behind Kandaya Bhavana,
                                   K.G. Road, Bengaluru-560
                                   009.

                              4.   THE TAHSILDAR,
                                   Bengaluru North Taluk,
                                   Bengaluru-560 009.

                              5.   THE STATION HOUSE
                                   OFFICER,
                                   K.P.    Agrahara Police
                                   Station, (Law & Order),
                                   Bengaluru.

                              6.   THE COMMISSIONER,
                                   Bruhath           Bangalore
                                   Mahangara    Palike,    N.R.
                                   Square, Bengaluru - 560 002.

                              7.   THE REGISTRAR,
                                   BIRTH AND DEATH,
                                   Bruhath           Bangalore
                                   Mahangara    Palike,    N.R.
                                   Square, Bengaluru - 560 002.

                                   [By Shantha.B. Mullur
                                    Adv.].

Date of institution of suit        12.01.2018
Nature of the suit                 For Declaration
Date of commencement               06.02.2019
of recording of evidence
Date on which Judgment             29.06.2019
was pronounced
 Total duration                  Days            Months     Years
                                  17             05          01

                               J UDGMENT

          This        is   plaintiffs'   suit     to     declare    that

    Smt.Lakshmamma R, wife of plaintiff No.1 and mother of

    plaintiffs No.2 and 3 is deemed to be dead in accordance

    with law and thereby direct the defendants No.6 and 7 to

    issue Death Certificate of Smt.Lakshmamma.R.


          2.      The brief facts of the plaintiffs' case is that,

    1st plaintiff husband of one Smt.Lakshmamma.R. D/o. Late

    Ramanna and out of their wed-lock they got two children

    i.e., plaintiffs No.2 and 3 herein. Plaintiffs alongwith said

    Lakshamma were residing in the House No.58/1, 6th Cross,

    Magadi road, Bengaluru-53. When such being the state of

    affairs, on 22.3.2010 said Lakshmamma had left the house

    as usual and did not return back to the house. The plaintiffs

    discussed with her parental family members and searched

    every where, but all their efforts went in vain and hence

    having       no    other   option,   her     brother    by     name

    Sri Chandrappa lodged a police complaint before 5th

    defendant, which came to be registered in Cr.No.92/2010.
 Subsequent to lodging of the said complaint, 1st plaintiff

made     all     his     efforts     to    trace     out   missing     of

Smt.Lakshmamma. They also issued paper publication in

respect of the same in Kannada daily news paper. From

22.3.2010 to this day, said Smt.Lakshmamma, who left the

house did not return back and her whereabouts could not

be traced by plaintiffs or the 5th defendant herein. As per

law, if whereabouts of the person is not known for a

continuous period of seven years it is presumed that such

person is dead.

       It is plaintiffs further case that, said Smt.Lakshmamma

has got        immovable        property in        her   name bearing

Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 13¾ guntas situated at

Puradapalya village, Tavarekere Hobli, Bengaluru South

Taluk.    Plaintiffs being her legal heirs are entitled to

succeed to her estate by changing necessary documents in

her    name.           Hence,      plaintiffs   issued     legal   notice

dt:4.11.2017      to the defendants for issuance of Death

Certificate. The defendants either replied said notice nor

issued the Death Certificate of Smt.Lakshmamma as
 prayed for. Having no other way, plaintiffs constrained to

file this suit for the reliefs mentioned supra.


         3.   On issuance of suit summons, defendants No.1

to   5    appeared   through    their   Government     Pleader.

Defendants No.1 to 3 and 5 resisted the suit of the plaintiffs

by filing common written statement asserting that, plaintiffs

have not complied with the statutory legal notice            as

required u/S.80(2) of CPC., prior to filing this suit and also

not approached the Court with clean hand. At Para-4 of the

written statement, these defendants specifically stated that,

the complainant Chandrappa had lodged a complaint on

27.3.2010 stating that, his elder sister Smt.Lakshmamma,

50 years had gone out of the house on 22.3.2010 at about

4.00 p.m. and had not returned back home and was found

missing and requested to trace her, on the basis of the

complaint given FIR was registered at K.P.Agrahara Police

Station in Cr.No.92/2010. During the course of investigation

dt:10.5.2010    Sri Srinivas S/o.Lt.Ramanna         has given

statement      stating that Smt.Lakshmamma, her husband

Maruthi i.e., 1st plaintiff herein, daughter Pushpavathi is deaf

and dumb and her son is addicted to alcohol and Maruthi
 has a property at 6th Cross Magadi road, K.P.Agrahara,

which consists of 4 shops and 1 small house, the shops

were     rented     to     Salamma      and     Mallamma.

Smt.Lakshmamma also having a property of 2.5 acres of

land at Tavarekere, Puttaiana Palya consisting Mango trees

and a 30 x 40 sized land being rented to one Anand for

growing Mushroom. 1st plaintiff filed a suit against tenants

to vacate the shop premises. There was also a property

dispute between brothers of Maruthi and his brothers

Krishnamurthy and Premkumar.       Smt.Lakshmamma also

had a financial dispute with Anand and Rajanna and there

was quarrel among them and hence suspected missing of

Smt.Lakshmamma on the basis of statement of said

Srinivas. The case was changed from woman missing to

case u/S.363 IPC i.e., kidnapping of a woman. FIR came to

be forwarded to 5th ACMM Court.       The family members

were interrogated, mobile call record details were also

collected and efforts had been carried out to trace

Smt.Lakshmamma.          Since no information     could be

obtained, 'C' report was submitted to the     to 5th ACMM
 Court on 24.3.2012. There is no cause of action arose to

file the above suit and hence pray for dismissal of this suit.


      4.    Defendants No.6 and 7 also resisted this suit by

filing their written statement asserting that, plaintiffs have

not approached      this Court with clean hands.       Missing

complaint of Smt.Lakshmamma came to be changed into

kidnap case on suspicion. There is also no cause of action

for the plaintiffs to file this petition and hence, pray for

dismissal of this suit against them.

      5.    Based on these pleadings, this Court has

framed following issues:

      1. Whether the plaintiffs prove that Smt.
         Lakshmamma.R W/o plaintiff No.1 and
         mother of plaintiff No.2 and 3 is not heard
         for more than 7 years?

      2. Whether the defendant No.1 to 3 and 5
         proves that suit of the plaintiffs is not
         maintainable for not issuing statutory
         notice u/s 80(2) of CPC.,?
      3. Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are
         entitle for the relief of declaration as
         sought?
      4. Whether the plaintiffs prove that they are
         entitle for the relief of mandatory
         injunction against defendant No.4 as
         sought?

      5. What order or decree?
       6.    2nd plaintiff got examined himself as PW.1 in

support of plaintiffs' case and got marked as many as 22

documents as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.22 at the first instance.

Further, PW.1 recalled himself and got marked another 5

documents as per Ex.P23 to P27. The defendants though

resisted the suit of the plaintiffs    stating that there is no

cause of action for the suit plaintiffs filed this suit, none of

the defendants stepped into the witness-box and led

evidence on behalf of their defence.


      7.   I have carefully scrutinized entire records before

me. Heard the arguments.


      8.    My findings on the above Issues are:

            Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
            Issue No.2 : In the Negative
            Issue No.3 : In the Affirmative
            Issue No.4 : In the Affirmative
            Issue No.5 : As per final order,
                         for the following:

                           REASONS

      9. ISSUES NO.1 and 2: These two issues are taken

up together for consideration to avoid repetition of facts.
       10.      It    is   the        case   of     plaintiffs    that,

Smt.Lakshmamma the wife of 1st plaintiff herein, mother of

plaintiffs No.2 and 3, who left the house as usual on

22.3.2010 did not return home and efforts made by them,

searching for her were in vain and till today she has not

returned and concerned police also not able to trace her.

In this regard 2nd plaintiff who got examined himself as

PW.1 got marked as many as 22 documents at the first

instance as per Ex.P1 to P22 and 5 more documents got

marked subsequently by recalling himself as Ex.P23 to P27.


      11.      Ex.P1 is the Genealogical Tree by way of

Affidavit.     However,       defendants     are    not     disputing

relationship        claimed     by    the   plaintiffs    with   said

Smt.Lakshmamma. Ex.P2 is the office copy of legal notice

dt:5.12.2017 issued to defendants No.1 to 5 herein. It is

also the contention of defendants No.1 to 5 that, plaintiffs

have not issued any notice as required u/S.80(2) of CPC.,

However, Ex.P2 establishes that much prior to filing of this

suit, plaintiffs issued notice to the defendants herein as

required u/S.80(2) CPC., Ex.P3 are the postal receipts for

having sent the notice through RPAD. Ex.P4 are two postal
 acknowledgements for having served the notice on

defendants No.3 and 4. Ex.P8 is the certified copy of sale

deed dt:15.11.2007.     Ex.P9 to P19 are all documents of

plaintiffs herein. Another vital document of plaintiffs herein

is with regard to their identity, which is not of much

consequence herein.      Another vital document is Ex.P20,

complaint given before K.P.Agrahara Police Station and

Ex.P21 is the FIR, Ex.P22 is the 'C' Report filed by the

concerned police stating that inspite of their best efforts

they were unable to trace Smt.Lakshmamma and thereby,

submitted their final 'C' report on 27.1.2012.


      12.   PW.1 further got marked endorsement issued

by concerned police as per Ex.P23 and P24. Ex.P25 is the

office copy of legal notice issued to defendants No.6 and 7.

Ex.P26 and P27 are postal receipt and postal track

consignment. In the cross-examination of PW.1 by learned

counsel for defendants No.1 to 5 by Smt.S.B.M, that FIR

came to be registered against him that he has kidnapped

his mother and said complaint forwarded to 5th ACMM. He

also admits that, in response to said complaint, many

relatives and witnesses were interrogated and enquired by
 concerned police. It is also elicited that he has not given

any notice to defendants No.1 to 5 herein before filing this

suit.   However, this version is contrary to the document

Ex.P2 produced and relied upon by the plaintiffs.         It is

further elicited by defendants No.6 and 7 learned Counsel

Sri M.S. that, there is delay in lodging complaint. It is also

elicited that, plaintiffs have no difficulty in examining

maternal uncle of PW.1. However, defendants No.1 to 5

admit in their written statement that, after taking all

necessary steps, concerned police i.e., defendant No.5

filed 'C' Report. On the other hand, himself has produced

said 'C' final report filed by 5th defendant in response to the

complaint lodged regarding missing of Smt.Lakshmamma

in question.     These documents establish that, said

Smt.Lakshmamma has not been traced from 22.3.2010

onwards even till filing of this suit. The documents relied

upon by the plaintiffs are not seriously disputed by the

defendants herein. Considering the same, more particularly

'C' Report Ex.P22 produced by the plaintiffs and also the

document Ex.P2 for having given notice defendants herein
 as required u/S.80(2) CPC., I have answered issue No.1 in

the affirmative and issue No.2 in the negative.


      13.   ISSUES NO.3 & 4: Since wife of 1st plaintiff and

mother of plaintiffs No.2 and 3 was missing from 22.3.2010

and concerned police have filed 'C' report as early as in the

year 2012 as per Ex.P22 and PW.1 stated on oath that,

even till today his mother has not been traced inspite of

their best efforts and more than 7 years already exhausted

at the time of filing of this suit.                As per   law,

Smt.Lakshmamma is presumed to be not alive. Under such

circumstances, plaintiffs are entitled for Death Certificate as

sought for and a direction in this regard to the defendants

herein by way of mandatory injunction. Accordingly, I have

answered these two issues in the affirmative.


      14. ISSUE NO.5: In view of my findings on Issues

No.1 to 4, I proceed to pass the following:

                        ORDER

Suit of the plaintiffs is decreed.

It is declared that Smt.Lakshmamma.R W/o. 1st plaintiff and mother of plaintiffs No.2 and 3 is declared to be dead as per the presumption under law.

Defendants No.6 and 7 are directed to issue Death Certificate of Smt.Lakshmamma.R to the plaintiffs by collecting necessary fee.

Further, plaintiffs are directed to take paper publication of declaration of death of Smt.Lakshmamma.R within 30 days from today and produce the same before defendants No.6 and 7 while applying for Death Certificate of Smt.Lakshmamma.R. Parties to bear their own cost considering the nature of suit.

Draw decree accordingly.

*** (Dictated to the J.W, computerized and print out taken by her, revised, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in open Court today the 29th day of June 2019).

(M. LATHA KUMARI) VII.ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU. ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of Plaintiffs:

PW.1 : Sri. M. Keshavamurthy Witness examined on behalf of Defendants:
- NIL -
Documents marked on behalf of Plaintiff:
Ex.P.1 Genealogical tree by way of affidavit Ex.P.2 Office copy of Legal notice dated 05.12.2017 issued to Defendants No.1 to 5.
   Ex.P.3     Postal receipts
   Ex.P.4     2 postal acknowledgment
   Ex.P.5     Copy of complaint given to department
of postal authority for not receiving another 3 acknowledgment Ex.P.6 Reply given by concerned postal and 7 authorities Ex.P.8 Certified copy of sale deed dated 15.11.2007 Original sale deed perused and returned to PW.1 after cross examination Ex.P.9 Certified copy of Field sketch Ex.P.10 Certified copy of affidavit dated 16.11.2007 of Department of Stamps and Registration.

Ex.P.11 Revenue document Ex.P.12 Mutation Ex.P.13 RTC Ex.P.14 Notarized copy of APL Card of my mother Original perused and returned. Ex.P.15 Notarized copy of election ID card of 1st plaintiff Ex.P.16 Notarized copy of Aadhar card of 1st plaintiff Ex.P.17 Notarized copy of 2nd plaintiff's PAN card.

Ex.P.18 Notarized copy of Election ID card of 2nd plaintiff Ex.P.19 Notarized copy of 3rd plaintiff's PAN card.

Ex.P.20 Attested copy of complaint given to K.P Agrahara Police station. Ex.P.21 Attested copy of FIR in Crime No.92.

Ex.P.22 Attested copy of Charge sheet (2 pages in all) Ex.P.23 Endorsement issued by K.P. Agrahara police station dated 27.1.2018.

Ex.P.24 Another Endorsement issued by K P. Agrahara police station dated 15.4.2018.

Ex.P.25 Office copy of legal notice issued to defendant 6 and 7.

Ex.P.26 Postal receipt Ex.P.27 Postal track consignment ( two in numbers) Documents marked on behalf of Defendants:

- Nil -
VII. ADDL.CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU.