SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(MP) 698

A.M.NAIK
Mritunjay Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Kumar Mishra Miscellaneous – Respondent


Advocates:
Pranay Verma for appellant; R.P. Agrawal with Lalit Pandey for respondents.

JUDGMENT

Short facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff appellant has instituted a suit for declaration about the date of death of Sudarshan Prasad. The plaintiff pleaded his pedigree in para 1 of the plaint. The plaintiff has stated that his predecessor Sudarshan Prasad died on 28.11.1992 at 11:00 p.m. However, the office of District Registrar, Bilihs and Deaths, Rewa issued a death certificate wherein Sudarshan Prasad is shown to have died on 29.11.1992. The plaintiff on coming to know of the aforesaid end or issued a notice dated 17.9.1996 under section 80, Criminal Procedure Code, with a request that the death cel1iticate issued with 29.11.1992 as date of death of Sudarshan Prasad may be withdrawn. The notice was not acceded to and consequently, the cause of action is stated to have arisen on 16.11.1996 i.e. on the expiry of the statutory period of notice under section 80, Civil Procedure Code. The aforesaid incorrect death cel1ificate is stated to have been issued on 8.8.1993 by the office of respondent No.3. The plaintiff also prayed for relief that the death certificate with 29.11.1992 as date of death of Sudarshan Prasad may be declared ineffective.













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top