IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR SUBSTITUTE SERVICE) NO. 2 of 2026 In R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 2421 of 2025 ==========================================================

DHULABHAI KARNABHAI BHARWAD & ORS.

Versus SHDARBEN D/O MAGANLAL SHANKARLAL & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR JF MEHTA(461) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2,3,4 MR N R DESAI(6504) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 4,5 MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 4,5 ==========================================================

CORAM:ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)

Date : 13/03/2026

IA ORDER

1.

Heard learned advocate Mr.J. F. Mehta for the Applicant and learned advocate Mr. Ishan Varyani on behalf of Mr. S. P. Majmudar appearing for Respondent No. 4-5.

2.

By way of this application, the Petitioners have prayed for permission to serve notice to Respondent No. 1 and 2 by way of publication in vernacular language in the local newspaper having wide circulation in the area where the said Respondent No. 1 and 2 have lastly resided, at the cost of the Petitioners.

3.

The learned advocate for the Petitioners has submitted that the order of issuance of notice was passed by the Hon’ble Court on 15.07.2025. Thereafter, the matter was adjourned from time to time, however, the notice could not be served qua Respondent No. 1 and 2 since Respondent No. 1 and 2 were not identified at the given address. That under the circumstances, the Petitioners have reason to believe that the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 cannot be served in ordinary way. The learned advocate appearing for the Petitioners has further submitted that the Petitioners are not aware of any fresh address of the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 and even after making all sincere efforts, could not be able to procure the present address of the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2. The learned advocate has also submitted that the address of the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 are as mentioned in the cause title of the present Civil Application and in the captioned matter, which is correct as per the Petitioners. The learned advocate has also submitted that the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 were lastly residing at the address mentioned in the cause title of the captioned matters.

4.

Considering the facts and circumstances emerging from the record, prayer for substituted service in terms of prayer para 3(a) of the present Civil Application is permitted. The Petitioners are permitted to serve the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 by way of publishing the service of notice in First Appeal No. 2421 of 2025 with Civil Application (For State) No. 1 of 2025 in view of order dated 15.07.2025, in vernacular language in local newspaper having wide circulation in the vicinity where the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 and 2 were known to have actually and voluntarily resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain. Further, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, simultaneously, it is also order to serve the notice to Respondent No. 1 and 2 by way of affixation on the conspicuous part of the premise of Respondent No. 1 and 2, where the aforesaid unserved Respondent No. 1 was lastly known to have actually and voluntarily resided.

5.

The cost of substituted service through paper publication shall be borne by the Petitioners.

6.

The aforesaid process of substituted service shall be carried out within 6 weeks from the date of this order. The office shall take all necessary steps in the above regard.

7.

Accordingly, the present Civil Application stands disposed of.

(M. B. RATHORE)

ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)

CHIRAG PARMAR