State Of Punjab vs Yash Pal Son Of Bhima Ram Presently ... on 20 October, 2009
In Rama Kant
Sharma's case (supra), concurrent findings, were recorded, by the
Courts below, that the plaintiff, came to know about his correct date of
RSA No. 2825 of 2009 15
birth, in 1950, but he filed the suit in 1980. In these circumstances, it
was held, that the suit, was barred by time. The facts of the aforesaid
case, are clearly distinguishable, from the facts of the instant case. In
the instant case, as stated above, the plaintiff, came to know of his
correct date of birth, in January, 1994. Immediately, thereafter, on
08.01.94, he sent a representation for correction of his date of birth
alongwith a copy of his birth certificate, regarding his date of birth, as
22.12.55, and a copy of the Matriculation Certificate, through postal
receipt, copy whereof is P10. Even, the plaintiff, could apply for
correction of his date of birth, on the basis of confirmatory
documentary evidence like Matriculation Certificate or birth certificate,
within a period of two years, from the date of issuance of the
notification, D3, referred to above, issued in 1994. He even applied for
correction of his date of birth, before the issuance of notification. It has
also been held above, that his representation dated 08.01.94, was
rejected, and he was conveyed decision thereof, vide letter dated
07.11.07 exhibit P11. So, cause of action, accrued, to him, on 07.11.07,
and thereafter, he filed a suit, within the period of three years. No help,
therefore, can be drawn, by the Counsel for the appellants, from the
aforesaid case, the facts whereof, are clearly distinguishable, from the
facts of the instant case. The submission of the Counsel for the
appellants, in this regard, being without merit, must fail, and the same
stands rejected.