Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
REKHA BORANA
Navneet Shah S/o Shri Gola Bhai Shah – Appellant
Versus
Mool Chand S/o Shri Bahadur Mal – Respondent
ORDER :
REKHA BORANA, J.
1. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 07.05.2022 passed by the District Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur in Civil Misc. Case No.50/2021 whereby the application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC as filed on behalf of applicant-defendant No.1 was dismissed.
2. Vide the application, it was submitted on behalf of the applicant that the notice/summons in the suit were never served on him and therefore, he could not appear before the learned Trial Court on the date fixed for hearing. It was submitted that the plaintiff intentionally filed the wrong address of applicant- defendant No.1 whereas he did not reside on said address. On the said address i.e. A-2/20, GDDIDC Somnath Industrial Estate, Daman (U.T) a factory in the name of ‘National Traders’ was running whereas the factory of the applicant was situated/running at A-2/21 with the name of ‘Apple Polymers’. The manager and the labourers of the applicant worked in the said factory i.e. ‘Apple Polymers’ and he himself had his business in the name of ‘Popular Stores’ at the address mentioned at Mumbai. Therefore, the notice as served by the plaintiff in the suit proceedings on the address at A-2/
Irregularity in service of summons does not justify setting aside an ex parte decree if the defendant had knowledge of the proceedings.
Proper service of summons is essential for the validity of court proceedings, and failure to adhere to the prescribed legal procedures can result in the setting aside of ex-parte decrees.
An ex-parte decree cannot stand if there is no valid proof of service of notice to the parties involved, emphasizing fairness and due process in civil proceedings.
Service of summons via email and WhatsApp is deemed valid under the Code of Civil Procedure when proof exists, and delay due to negligence in responding to litigation cannot be condoned in commercial....
The High Court, exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, cannot reappreciate the evidence or substitute its subjective opinion in place of the finding....
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 :
Back to top
