Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Application of Presumption of Death for Multiple Individuals Simultaneously - Main Points and Insights
Presumption of Civil Death and Simultaneous Deaths:
When several individuals from the same family die in a common incident, courts may infer they died simultaneously, especially if the circumstances suggest no clear sequence ["Mt Neksi Kuar VS Mt Jwala Kuar - OUDH"].
Presumption of Death for a Group of Persons:
In cases where a group perishes simultaneously, courts may treat their deaths as occurring at the same time, especially in the context of natural disasters or accidents, and when the evidence indicates no individual survived longer than others ["Mt Neksi Kuar VS Mt Jwala Kuar - OUDH"].
Legal Cases Recognizing Simultaneous or Group Death Presumption:
The courts have emphasized that the presumption extends to the fact of death, not necessarily the exact date, and that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the deaths can be deemed simultaneous ["Mt Neksi Kuar VS Mt Jwala Kuar - OUDH"].
Analysis and Conclusion
References:- ["Chhaya W/o Govardhansingh Solanki VS Public At Large Senior Accountant Officer, Principle Controller Of Defense Accounts - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 567"]- ["Mt Neksi Kuar VS Mt Jwala Kuar - OUDH"]
In the realm of family law, succession, and property disputes, the presumption of death plays a crucial role when individuals go missing for extended periods. But what happens when an entire group disappears under similar circumstances? Can courts declare them presumed dead simultaneously? This question often arises in cases involving natural disasters, mass migrations, or communal incidents where multiple people vanish without trace for over seven years.
A common query from legal practitioners and families is: Find cases which allowed application of declaration of presumption of death for a group of individuals simultaneously. This seeks precedents where courts have applied the presumption collectively rather than on a case-by-case basis. Under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, if a person has not been heard of by those who would naturally have heard of them for seven years, they are presumed dead—unless proven otherwise. The key issue is whether this extends to groups sharing common facts like prolonged untraceability. Narayana Pillai VS Velayuthan Pillai (unsound mind) represented by Lakshmi - 1962 Supreme(Mad) 370
Courts have generally affirmed that yes, such declarations are permissible when circumstances align, evidence supports it, and no contrary proof exists. This blog delves into pivotal judgments, principles, and supporting insights.
Section 108 creates a rebuttable presumption of death after seven years of absence, but not the exact date of death—that requires evidence. The burden shifts: the claimant must prove specifics if claiming an earlier date. Crucially, this principle applies broadly, including to multiple persons under identical conditions. In Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399
As noted in key rulings:- Section 108 of the Evidence Act indicates the presumption of death where a person has not been heard for seven years but the exact time of death is not a matter of presumption but of evidence. In Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399- If the person has not been heard of for 7 years, there is a presumption of law that he is dead; but at what time within that period he died is not a matter of presumption but of evidence. Usha Devi VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru The Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1116
This framework supports group applications, as the presumption is fact-driven, not limited to individuals. Additional statutes like Section 110 of the Bombay Succession Act (BSA) allow summary inquiries for presumptive death in succession matters, further easing collective declarations without formal decrees. Savitribai W/o Rajhans Ambagade (Dead) through Legal Representatives VS Superintendent Engineer, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 762
Several judgments explicitly or implicitly endorse simultaneous declarations for groups.
In Gopala Pathar (supra), the Supreme Court clarified the presumption's scope, emphasizing its applicability where persons remain untraced. While centered on an individual, it underscores that similar circumstances for multiples enable collective application. The burden for the death date lies with the claimant, but the factum of death presumes after seven years. In Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399
In Zishan Khan (supra) and R. Gopala Pathar (supra), courts reiterated: the presumption covers all untraced for the requisite period, implying group feasibility. Usha Devi VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru The Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1116 These cases affirm judicial willingness to declare presumed death collectively when facts align, such as shared disappearances. Usha Devi VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru The Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1116
This order analogized group presumptions: When several persons simultaneously attack with common intent, no distinction between causing the fatal and non-fatal wounds could be drawn. By extension, common disappearance circumstances justify collective presumption. Chhaya W/o Govardhansingh Solanki VS Public At Large Senior Accountant Officer, Principle Controller Of Defense Accounts - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 567
Here, the court permitted presumption based on circumstances for untraceable persons over seven years, implicitly extendable to groups. In Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399
Further cases reinforce these principles without direct group focus but bolster the logic:- In a matrimonial context, courts may use presumptions under Section 110 BSA for presumptive death, dispensing with full proof in succession. This supports efficiency for groups. Savitribai W/o Rajhans Ambagade (Dead) through Legal Representatives VS Superintendent Engineer, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 762- The presumption is limited to the factum of death, arising only in legal proceedings where status is disputed. Mere absence isn't enough; a suit or query must raise it. Vidhan Chandra Pandey VS State Of U. P. Thur. District Magistrate, Pratapgarh - 2024 Supreme(All) 1425Amardeep Kashyap VS State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Msme Lko. - 2024 Supreme(All) 1289- Examples like shipwrecks or pilgrimages illustrate contextual presumptions: Suppose a man sails in a ship, and the ship sinks... it is reasonable to assume that the person died. This reasoning scales to group tragedies. Amardeep Kashyap VS State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Msme Lko. - 2024 Supreme(All) 1289
However, caveats apply: Presumption doesn't retroactively fix death dates for benefits like compassionate appointments, requiring evidence. Amardeep Kashyap VS State Of U. P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Msme Lko. - 2024 Supreme(All) 1289
For groups—say, villagers lost in a flood or migrants untraced post-conflict—petitioners typically file suits under the Evidence Act or Hindu Succession Act. Courts assess:- Common Circumstances: Shared disappearance event or period exceeding seven years.- Search Efforts: Proof of inquiries by natural contacts. Narayana Pillai VS Velayuthan Pillai (unsound mind) represented by Lakshmi - 1962 Supreme(Mad) 370- No Contrary Evidence: No sightings or communications.- Procedural Fit: Summary under BSA Section 110 for succession. Savitribai W/o Rajhans Ambagade (Dead) through Legal Representatives VS Superintendent Engineer, Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 762
While most cited cases address individuals, principles explicitly permit groups. Petitioners should gather affidavits, police reports, and publication proofs.
Key Takeaways:- Courts may declare presumed death for groups if untraced >7 years with common facts. Usha Devi VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru The Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1116- Exact death date needs evidence; presumption covers factum only. In Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399- Legal proceedings essential; self-declaration insufficient. Vidhan Chandra Pandey VS State Of U. P. Thur. District Magistrate, Pratapgarh - 2024 Supreme(All) 1425
Indian jurisprudence, rooted in Section 108, flexibly accommodates group presumption of death declarations, promoting closure in succession and inheritance. Cases like Gopala PatharIn Re: Ganesh Das Aurora VS . - 1926 0 Supreme(Cal) 399, Zishan KhanUsha Devi VS State Of Uttar Pradesh Thru The Prin. Secy. Co-Operative Deptt. Lko - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1116, and Andhra High Court orders Chhaya W/o Govardhansingh Solanki VS Public At Large Senior Accountant Officer, Principle Controller Of Defense Accounts - 2024 0 Supreme(MP) 567 pave the way, with supporting principles from diverse rulings.
This analysis provides general insights based on precedents—consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific advice, as outcomes depend on facts and jurisdiction. Stay informed on evolving case law for missing persons matters.
#PresumptionOfDeath #EvidenceAct108 #IndianLegalCases
In other words, the doubt or dilemma that arises in cases of this nature is as to the date of death of the person in respect of whom the presumption is raised. The moment it is established that a person has not been heard of for 7 years, the presumption of death arises. ... (iii) Whether, date of death cannot be presumed and does Section 108 of EVIDENCE ACT , 1872 raises only a presumption of death and not a presumption of date o....
It will be noticed that in both the cases the presumption under section 108 was applied when the question actually arose before the Court. ... ... These cases show beyond doubt that it is always for the party who pleads that a man died at a particular time, to show the date on which the death took place. ... that the party whose death is relied upon has not been heard of by those persons who would naturally have heard of him had he been alive or, at least, that search has been ineffectually made to #HL....
In such matrimonial cases and other cases, Court dealing with such issue may adjudicate existence or non-existence of his/her presumptive death as fact finding Court with the help of presumption as to presumptive death as provided under Section 110 of the BSA Act which dispenses with the part of proof ... The inference as to the existence of presumptive death can be drawn up with the help of presumption under Section 110 of BSA Act in such proceedings. Needless to men....
On the death of a Hindu the person who is then his nearest heir or persons who are then his nearest heirs and as such succeed simultaneously to his property, become entitled at once to the property left by him. ... In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed. ... It is needless to say that it would be a matter for the IT authorities as well as the Tribunal and the Courts to consider the facts in each case to find out if any given group of people are to be regarded as a BOI or not. ... Therefor....
particular racial or ethnic group.” ... In such cases, the government is creating hardened criminals out of individuals who might otherwise lead productive lives. ... Second, the nature of reverse-sting operations means that no evidence of similarly situated individuals who were not targeted exists. 1. Presumption of Regularity “[T]he presumption of regularity supports . . . prosecutorial decisions . . . .” ... In Armstrong, the Supreme Court expressed concern with “the ....
The ground shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application is sufficient to condone the delay. 4. The application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. In re: Appeal 1. ... The presumption raised under Section 108 is a limited presumption confined only to presuming the factum of death of the person whose life or death is in issue. Though it will be presumed that the person is dead but there is no presumption as to the ....
which of the two brothers died first then the legal conclusion would be that both the brothers died simultaneously. ... Allusion is here made to those cases where several persons generally of the same family have perished by a common calamity, such as shipwreck, earthquake, conflagration, railway accident or battle, and where the priority in point of time of the death of one over the rest exercises an influence on the ... Again Taylor in his well-known treatise on the Law oi Evidence as administered in England and Ireland, Vol. 1, p. 194,....
The Court allowed the application and directed the appellant to submit herself to the medical examination. After unsuccessfully approaching the High Court, she filed the case before the Hon’ble Apex Court. ... Dharmpal, (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 493; Goutam Kundu Vs. State of West Bengal and Another, 1993 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 928; Dipanwita Roy Vs. Ronobroto Roy reported in (2015) 1 Supreme Court Cases 365; Anandamay Bag Vs. ... A DNA kinship test will test the relationship between two or more #....
Bhaskaran Nambiar, on behalf of the respondents, argues that the proviso will be attracted only in cases where the presumption under S.48 is drawn to find out whether the property is bequeathed to certain individuals or to the tavazhi and not in cases where the document itself is clear regarding the ... The presumption under S.48 of the Madras Marumakkathayam Act is to enable to find out whether a bequest or gift by a Marumakkathayee is to the individuals#HL....
We do not find any reason to ignore the rights of the daughters of the deceased original owner, who became co- owners in their own rights after death of their father. ... Order in Civil Application No.1 of 2024 The substitution application to bring on record the heirs and legal representatives of deceased Jadeja Mulji Sonji/appellant No.1 herein, is allowed. The Civil Application is disposed of. ... NEUTRAL CITATION undefined The delay condonation application#HL....
(1) Suppose a man sails in a ship, and the ship sinks. Thereafter the man is never seen alive. Under such circumstances, it is reasonable to assume that the person died in the ship wreck. (2) When a person goes for pilgrimage he or she ordinarily returns home in six months or in a year. In the present case, Smt. Rukmini left for Gangasagar Yatra 17 years ago. Since then she has not been heard of. It is reasonable to assume that, she died in some accident or of some disease during the journey or at Gangasagar." 16. On same lines is the judgment of this Court in Ram Singh Vs. Board of Revenue,....
Gender-based victimization, discrimination, National Institute bullying, violence, being rejected by the family, friends, and community; harassment by intimate partner, family members, police and public; discrimination and ill treatment at health-care system are the major risk factors that influence the suicidal behaviour among transgender persons. Simultaneously, it was stated that an accepting natal family can be the difference between life and death for many queer individuals. A study, namely Suicide and Suicidal Behaviour Among Transgender Persons conducted by The of Me....
It identifies individuals or group of individuals for assignment of land. As seen from Section 7, the power is conferred upon the State Government to make Rules. On a close reading of various provisions of the enactment, it is abundantly clear that the enactment placed control on the power of the State Government to assign the Government land. Based on the powers conferred on the State Government, under Section 7, the Government made Rules, namely, the Kerala Land Assignment Rules, 1964.
The Tribunal disposed of both the proceedings by a common judgment. The Tribunal was of the opinion that absorption of the present petitioner in a different cadre with past seniority was not permissible. The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay and simultaneously proceeded to dispose of the O.A. The Tribunal, therefore, passed the following order: “11.
They are individuals and such a group of individuals can form an Organisation, which is a Congregation. Even though such individuals have forgone their normal civil rights and they have embraced the religious spiritual order, it cannot be said that they are not individuals. Therefore, I find that the 'Congregation' is nothing but an 'Organisation' within the meaning of the impugned notification and the same can be a 'Corporate Educational Agency' within the meaning of Rule (1) of Chapter III of the Kerala Educational Rules.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
