IMPORTANT POINT
Where notice of SLP was sent to respondent but it came back with an endorsement "Not present. Hence return to sender". It would be obvious that the respondent is avoiding service. Notice must, therefore, be deemed to have been served on the respondent.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Art. 136-Notice of appeal by special leave-Sent to respondent but returned with remarks "Not present. Hence return to sender"-Whether amounts to service ? (Yes)-Appeal allowed on the basis of earlier decision. (Paras 3 & 4)
Held : It would be obvious that the respondent is avoiding service. Notice must, therefore, be deemed to have been served on the respondent. (Para 1)

ORDER

Though the notice was sent to the respondent on September 28, 1993, it came back with an endorsement "Not present. Hence return to sender". It would be obvious that the respondent is avoiding service. Notice must, therefore, be deemed to have been served on the respondent.

2. Leave granted.

3. The controversy raised in this case is covered by the decision of this Court in Karnataka Public Service Commission & Ors. v. B.M. Vijaya Shanker & Ors.1

4. Following the said decision, the appeal is allowed and the order of the Tribunal is set aside, but without costs.

Appeal allowed.

*******

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

1996 Supreme(SC) 125

1996(1) Supreme 730SUPREME COURT OF INDIAK. Ramaswamy, B.L. Hansaria and S.B. Majmudar, JJ.Karnataka Public Service Commission -AppellantversusP. S. Ramakrishna -RespondentCivil Appeal No. 2413 of 1996Decided on 17-1-1996Counsel for the Parties :For the Appellant : M. Veerappa, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINTWhere notice of SLP was sent to respondent but it came back with an endorsement "Not present. Hence return to sender". It would be obvious that the respondent is avoiding service. Notice must, therefore, be deemed to have been served on the respondent.

Cases Referred (1)

1996(1) Supreme 730
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. Ramaswamy, B.L. Hansaria and S.B. Majmudar, JJ.
Karnataka Public Service Commission -Appellant
versus
P. S. Ramakrishna -Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2413 of 1996
Decided on 17-1-1996
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant : M. Veerappa, Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
Where notice of SLP was sent to respondent but it came back with an endorsement "Not present. Hence return to sender". It would be obvious that the respondent is avoiding service. Notice must, therefore, be deemed to have been served on the respondent.