Judgment :- 1. Animadverting upon the order dated 02.07.2012 passed by the learned I Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in O.S.SR.No.17980 of 2012, this civil revision petition is focussed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would echo the cri de coeur of his client to the effect that the revision petitioner/plaintiff's husband was not to be seen or heard for more than seven years and before his absence, he was working as a Clerk in the Public Works Department at Tambaram. However, the Controlling Authority is only the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Chepauk. Hence, the suit was filed before the City Civil Court, Chennai; but it was returned on the ground that the court had no territorial jurisdiction. 3. A mere perusal of the plaint would display and demonstrate that the plaint itself was not properly drafted and the prayer in the plaint would run thus: "To pass a judgment and decree - to declare the plaintiff's husband Thiru.Muthu who is missing since 07.04.2005 for more than a period of 7 years is civily dead." (extracted as such) 4. At this juncture, my mind is reminiscent and redolent of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, which runs thus: "108. Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years – [Provided that when] the question is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is proved that he has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard of him if he had been alive, the burden of proving that he is alive is [shifted to] the person who affirms it."and that is a rule of evidence. 5. A bare prayer by the plaintiff without anything more in the aforesaid manner is not tenable. If at all the plaintiff wants any substantive relief, then there should be a prayer for declaring her status and also the relief, which she wants from the defendants comprehensively as per the Specific Relief Act and after paying necessary court fees depending upon the peculiar jurisdiction of the court as well as the territorial jurisdiction of the court, the plaint should be represented. Once those procedures are complied with, it is for the court to number the plaint subject to maintainability and thereafter under Order 14 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, preliminary issues could be framed relating to jurisdiction and other related issues and decide the matter, after hearing both sides. As of now, the plaint presented was not tenable and it is for the plaintiff to do the needful as stated supra. 6. With the above direction, this civil revision petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.