Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SATYEN VAIDYA
Gambhari – Appellant
Versus
Ved Prakash – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging ex-parte decree via revision petition. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 8) |
| 2. no summons served; refused rpad alleged. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 3. lower courts upheld rpad service; time-barred. (Para 7 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. no ordinary process summons issued. (Para 17) |
| 5. cpc mandates ordinary process service. (Para 18) |
| 6. no exemption for ordinary process granted. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. service reports rebuttable; circumstances ignored. (Para 21) |
| 8. knowledge date linked to valid service. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 9. remand for fresh order 9 rule 13 decision. (Para 24) |
JUDGMENT :
Satyen Vaidya, J.
By way of instant petition, the petitioner has invoked revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the ‘Code’), to assail order dated 9.1.2020, passed by the learned District Judge Bilaspur in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5/14 of 2019, whereby the order dated 31.5.2019, passed by learned Civil Judge, Bilaspur in CMA No. 193/6 of 2009 has been affirmed.
2. The respondents herein (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) had filed Civil Suit No. 54-1 of 2002 against the petitioner herein (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) f
Non-issuance of summons via mandatory ordinary process, absent exemption or plaintiffs' request for registered post, renders ex-parte decree vulnerable; lower courts' failure to consider this suspect....
Legal procedures for serving notices must be followed, and refusal of service cannot negate the validity of service when appropriately executed.
Actual service of summons by registered post acknowledgment due is valid, even if defendants reside outside jurisdiction, and non-compliance with procedural rules does not equate to no service.
Setting aside ex-parte decree – Defendant has to show and satisfy that summons of suit was not duly served and that defendant was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing when suit was called upo....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of proper service of summons as per the requirements of Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
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....
Proper service of summons is essential for the validity of court proceedings.
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
