Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

january 2026

Bombay High Court · 2026-01-29

MR. VISHWESH DOGRA SUVARNA vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CHEIF SECRETARY,

Citation / case number
IA/3710/2019
Court
Bombay High Court
Petitioner
MR. VISHWESH DOGRA SUVARNA
Respondent
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CHEIF SECRETARY,

Judgment text excerpt

ppn 1 1.fa-55.16(j).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Digitally signed CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by PRACHI PRACHI PRANESH PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR NANDIWADEKAR FIRST APPEAL NO.55 OF 2016 Date: 2026.01.29 18:17:47 +0530 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3710 OF 2019 Vishwesh Dogra Suvarna ) Age 35 years, Indian Inhabitant ) Permanent residing of Flat No.D/20, ) 4th Floor, Nancy Colony, ) Borivali (East), Mumbai – 400 066. ) Presently residing at Chaitaly PG ) Room No.10, Opp. Syndicate Bank, ) Bilekahalli, Bannerghatta Road, ) Bangalore – 560076. ) ….Appellant (Orig. Plaintiff) V/s. State of Maharashtra ) through its Chief Secretary ) State of Maharashtra, ) General Administration Department ) Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032. ) .…Respondent (Orig. Defendant) ---- Mr. K. B. Adyanthaya i/by Mr. R. K. Shetty for the Appellant. Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, AGP for the Respondent. ---- CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATED : 29 January 2026 Judgment : 1. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and order dated 31 October 2015 whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff-son has been dismissed and a declaration sought for the plaintiff's father be declared as ‘dead’ was rejected. 2. Briefly, the reason given by the Trial Court was that no evidence was led on the memory loss of the father of the plaintiff. Also, no evidence was ppn 2 1.fa-55.16(j).doc tendered to show that other than the plaintiff, there are no other legal heirs. However, the Trial Court accepted that the plaintiff has tendered the complaint made with the Police Authorities and certificate issued by the Police Authorities i.e., father was missing from 8 April 2003. The Trial Court also records that the plaintiff had filed ration card, birth certificate, passport, newspaper advertisement etc. 3. I have heard the learned co

MR. VISHWESH DOGRA SUVARNA vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CHEIF SECRETARY, · Niyam