IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA RSA No. 196 of 1999 Date of Decision: 3.12.2009. Radha Krishan and others ..Appellants. Versus. Mansha Ram and others ..Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. Whether approved for Reporting?No For the Appellant(s): Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate. For the Respondent(s): Mr.K.D. Sood, Advocate. Deepak Gupta, J.( Oral). This appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law: “1.Whether the certificate regarding date of death by the Panchayat where a person ordinarily resided at the time of death could be ignored and the certificate issued by some other Panchayat indicating contrary date of death could be relied? 2.Whether oral evidence regarding the fact of date of death was necessary when documentary evidence to that effect was available? 3.Whether finding of the fact by a competent criminal court binds the parties in civil litigation between them? 4.Whether inferences contrary to the documentary evidence can be drawn by the courts?” - 2 - Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Sh.Bhandaru, predecessor-in-interest of the appellants filed a suit in the trial Court claiming that his mother Smt.Ram Dei was the sister of one Nandu. Defendants 1&2 were the brothers of Nandu. It was alleged that the whereabouts of Nandu were not known for almost 50-60 years. On 31.10.1977 Hari Ram brother of Nandu and maternal Uncle of the plaintiff filed an application to the Tehsildar, Ghumarwin that the mutation of the estate of Nandu be attested in favour of Hari Ram and Narainu. The plaintiff alleges that his mother Ram Dei was alive at this time and she was also entitled to inherit 1/3rd share in the estate of Nandu. According to the plaintiff the succession to the estate of Nandu open in the year 1977 and the mother Smt.Ram Dei, sister of Nandu expired on 27.9.1979. Accordingly he claimed that 1/3rd share was to go to his mother Ram Dei. The defendants contested the suit and took the plea that Ram Dei had expired prior to 31.10.1977. They took a specific stand that she had expired on 7.9.1977 and not on 27.9.1979 as alleged by the plaintiff. - 3 - The suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed on this ground and the lower Appellate Court confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial Court on the ground that Ram Dei had expired prior to the opening of succession to the estate of Nandu. Though the appeal has been admitted on the above questions of law but I find that no question of law in fact arises in the appeal. The question as to what is the date of death of Smt.Ram Dei is a pure question of fact and not a question of law. There were two conflicting certificates regarding the date of death of Smt.Ram Dei. Both the Courts below have held that even the plaintiff while appearing in the witness box did not give the date of death of his mother Smt.Ram Dei. No co-villager or member of the Panchayat was examined to corroborate the plea that Smt.Ram Dei died on 27.9.1979. On the other hand both the Courts below held that the defendants have proved beyond doubt that Ram Dei died on 7.9.1977 prior to the date of opening of the succession of the estate of Nandu. It cannot be said that there is any mis-reading of evidence or that the findings - 4 - recorded by the courts below are perverse. In fact the questions of law framed do not arise in the case at all. In view of the above discussion, I find no merit in the appeal which is accordingly dismissed. No costs. December 3, 2009. ( Deepak Gupta ), J. PV