Civil courts may declare a missing person presumed dead under Section 108 without relief against government authorities.

Satyendra Kumar Pal reportedly disappeared on 10 July 2007, aged 44.

His brother lodged a missing-person report the following day; searches and a newspaper notice did not establish his whereabouts.

The plaintiffs, claiming to be his legal heirs, sought a declaration of civil death under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

The trial court dismissed the suit for want of cause of action, and the first appellate court affirmed that decision.

In the second appeal, the High Court noted that an application for leave under Section 80(2) CPC was on the trial court record but had not been addressed; the police authorities also remained unable to provide Satyendra’s whereabouts.

Whether the courts below overlooked the plaintiffs’ pending application for leave under Section 80(2) CPC when dismissing the suit

Whether the courts below erred in finding no cause of action against the authorities in a suit seeking a declaration of civil death

Whether notice under Section 80 CPC was necessary where the plaintiffs sought no direction or other relief against the defendants

Section 80(1) CPC ordinarily requires prior notice before suing the Government or a public officer, while Section 80(2) permits suit without notice with the court’s leave for urgent or immediate relief.

The court relied on authorities recognising that an objection to non-service may be treated as waived in appropriate circumstances, including where it was not pursued or the State participated without raising it.

Sections 107 and 108 of the Indian Evidence Act govern the burden of proving life or death: where a person has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard from him, the burden shifts to the person asserting that he is alive; the presumption concerns death, not its date or circumstances.

A civil court may grant a declaration of civil death in its plenary jurisdiction under Section 9 CPC, without Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act being an obstacle.

The High Court found that the Section 80(2) application was in the record but had been overlooked by both courts below.

It further held that notice was unnecessary in the circumstances: no direction or relief was sought against the Government authorities, the police defendant did not raise non-service as an objection, and no issue on notice had been framed.

The authorities’ participation and failure to pursue the objection supported treating notice as waived.

On the merits, Satyendra had been missing for more than seven years, and the police could not furnish his whereabouts despite being given an opportunity to do so in the second appeal.

Applying Section 108, the court held that the statutory presumption of death arose and that the civil court could grant the requested declaration.

It declared Satyendra Kumar Pal civilly dead under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and directed that a decree be drawn up.