P.V.DIXIT
KAMLABAI – Appellant
Versus
DHULA – Respondent
( 1 ) IN a suit filed by the petitioner for the recovery of the Rs. 385/- from the opponent, as the defendant could not be served personally, substituted service by the order of the court under Order 5, Rule 20, C. P. C. was made by publishing a notice in Nai Dunia, a daily Hindi paper published in Indore. The defendant did not appear in the suit in response to the notice. The suit was, therefore, decreed ex parte against him on 26-10-1956. On 12-1-1957, the defendant presented an application for setting aside the ex parta decree on the ground that the summons was not duly served on him and that ha got knowledge of the decree on or about 10-1-1957. The learned Civil Judge, Second Class, Mahidpur, accepted this plea of the defendant and set aside the ex parte decree against him. The plaintiff has now filed this revision petition against the order of the lower Court setting aside the ex parte decree.
( 2 ) MR. Kutumbale, learned Counsel for the petitioner, urged that the defendant was dully served for purposes of Article 164 of the Limitation Act, when substituted service was ordered by the Court under Order 5, Rule 20, C. P. C. and that therefore, the defendant shoul
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.