Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya vs State Of U.P.& Ors on 13 December, 2012
Maya Devi v. State through Chief Secretary & Ors. CS No. 91/12
Thereafter, when Sh. Ramanand did not return for a couple of hours,
the plaintiff and other family members got worried about him and
started searching for him at all the places he could have been found but
the plaintiff could not find him anywhere. It is further averred that
when Sh. Ramanand did not return even on the next day and could not
be found by anyone, the plaintiff along with other relatives
approached the police station at Sangam Vihar and a missing report
was filed by Sh. Kishen Lal, brotherÂinÂlaw of plaintiff on 28.03.2004
at around 07:50 pm. Thereafter, several missing notices were
advertised on notice boards, advertising poles and at other places in
and around Sangam Vihar but Sh. Ramanand could not be traced. It is
avereed that the plaintiff and her family members have not been able
to trace Sh. Ramanand since 27.03.2004. Further, they have not heard
of him from anyone during all theses years. It is further submitted that
the plaintiff does not have any grievance against any of the defendants
and they have been arrayed as defendants because they are necessary
parties to the this suit. It is admitted by the plaintiff that he has not
filed any other similar suit with respect to the same cause of action in
any court of law and the suit is not barred by limitation.