SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 1680

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
, J
Neelam Sharma v. Brijmohan Dua and Others


1. None appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 / defendants even after service of notice through substituted mode by paper publication dated 20.11.2021.

2. Notice sent to defendant Nos. 1 and 2 on the address have been returned back with a note that 'door was locked from inside' and it was not opened from the person present inside the house. Thereafter, when Process Server went to address of defendant Nos. 1 to 3, upon knocking the door, one of lady stated that 'they do not want to accept any notice' and the Process Server returned back the copy of notice with an endorsement as above on 22.10.2021.

3. In view of the above, substituted service has been effected through paper publication upon respondents / defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and thereafter, case is heard finally.

4. Challenge in this petition is to order dated 30.03.2021 passed by learned Fourth Civil Judge Class - II, Bilaspur whereby learned trial Court dismissed the application under S.45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 for conducting DNA test of the petitioner / plaintiff and defendant / respondent No.1.

5. Facts relevant for disposal of this petition are that the petitioner / plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title, pe



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

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

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top