Declaration regarding death of person who is missing for seven years
If the test of preponderance of probability laid down by Section 3 of the Act is applied, that is to say a fact is said to be proved if the Court considers its existence to be so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon certain supposition that it exists, then it would have to be held that Kushal has died on 13th November, 1995 or soon thereafter. If he was alive after 13th November, 1995, there was no reason for him not to contact his immediate family members. It is not the case that Kushal left the house in distress or he was under some disability which prevented him from returning home or even contacting his family members. Nor is it shown that Kushal was missing in such circumstances or could be at such place wherefrom he could not even contact his parents or close family members. Considering the fact that Kushal was not under any distress or disability nor was he in the situation wherefrom he could not contact his family members coupled with the fact that he has not contacted his family members at all since 13th November, 1995 and has been declared to be dead by the declaratory decree of the competent Court makes us, as men of ordinary prudence, believe that Kushal must have died on 13th November, 1995 or soon thereafter
W.P. No. 999 of 2006
2010ACJ479, AIR2008Bom196, 2008(6)BomCR311, 2008(5)MhLj757
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided On: 06.06.2008
Appellants: Bhanumati Dayaram Mhatre
Vs.
Respondent: Life Insurance Corporation of India
Vs.
Respondent: Life Insurance Corporation of India
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.B. Mhase and D.G. Karnik, JJ.
