Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Remarks addressee left without instruction and similar postal remarks—such as addressee left, addressee left without instruction, addressee has left, not found, out of station—are frequently recorded by postal authorities when notices or summons are returned. These remarks indicate that the addressee was either not available, moved, or refused to accept the notice, but do not necessarily imply improper service ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"].
The law recognizes that service of notice by post, even when returned with such remarks, can be deemed proper or complete if the notice was sent to the correct address and properly addressed, based on principles established by judicial decisions and statutory provisions. For example, the Supreme Court has held that when a notice is served at the proper address, it shall be deemed to be served unless the contrary is proved ["Priyanka Kumari VS Shailendra Kumar - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["Vijay Kumar VS Vijay Laxmi - Himachal Pradesh"]; ["Suo-Moto Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh VS Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Department of Postal and Telegraph, Government of India - Telangana"]; ["Suo-Moto Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh VS Union of India - Telangana"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"].
Presumptions under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, support that sending notices via registered post to the correct address creates a presumption of service, even if the addressee does not directly receive it or if the notice is returned with remarks like left, not found, or left instructions ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["Vijay Kumar VS Vijay Laxmi - Himachal Pradesh"]; 03200000021.
The remarks addressee left without instruction or similar are not conclusive proof of improper service; rather, they reflect circumstances where the addressee has moved or refused to accept the notice, but service at the correct address remains valid unless proven otherwise ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"].
In matrimonial disputes, such postal remarks alone do not automatically amount to proper service. The courts have recognized that service can be deemed complete if the notice was sent to the correct address and the postal authorities have made proper remarks, and the burden is on the opposing party to prove non-service or improper service ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"]; ["VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH - Supreme Court"].
Analysis and Conclusion:Remarks indicating addressee left without instruction or similar are generally accepted as valid postal indications that service was effected at the correct address. When notices or summons are sent via registered post to the proper address, such remarks are presumed to support proper service, especially under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. Therefore, in matrimonial disputes, the absence of the addressee at the time of delivery or return with such remarks does not automatically invalidate service; it can be considered proper unless the respondent proves otherwise.
In matrimonial disputes, serving summons or notices correctly is crucial for court proceedings to move forward. But what happens when a registered post returns with a postal endorsement like addressee left without instruction? Does this amount to proper service? This common question arises frequently: remarks addressee left without instruction by the post office amount to proper service of summons in a matrimonial dispute?
This blog post breaks down the legal principles, key court decisions, and practical implications based on established precedents. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
Generally, when a notice or summons is sent by registered post and the postal authorities record an endorsement such as left or left without instruction, this constitutes proper service of process, including in matrimonial disputes, unless proven otherwise. Anil Kumar Gupta VS Kausalya Devi Modi - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1103Ajibar Rahaman VS Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Ltd. - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 820
The presumption of proper service arises when the letter is properly addressed, prepaid, and posted, with postal endorsements indicating delivery or attempted delivery. Courts have consistently held that such remarks are prima facie evidence of service, shifting the burden to the addressee to rebut it by proving non-receipt or wrongful endorsement. Union Of India VS Mohd. Nazim - 1979 0 Supreme(SC) 438Anil Kumar Gupta VS Kausalya Devi Modi - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1103
Under Indian law, service by registered post is deemed complete upon postal endorsement. The Supreme Court in MADAN AND CO. VS. WAZIR JAIVIR CHAND emphasized that endorsements like left or left without instruction are prima facie proof of service. The onus then falls on the addressee to disprove it. Anil Kumar Gupta VS Kausalya Devi Modi - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1103
This principle holds in various contexts, including matrimonial cases where timely service ensures jurisdiction. For instance, multiple Supreme Court observations note: Addressee Left without instruction in respect of Respondent No. 2. VIKAS SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BAHADUR PRASAD SHARMA : 19-A, JAWAHAR COLONY DISTRICT GWALIOR , DISTRICT: GWALIOR ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH vs LAXMAN DESHMUKH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE BALASAHAB DESHMUKH : SAHUKAAR NAYAK HOUSE A 2 ASHOK VIHAR COLONY TANSEN RD, GWALIOR, , DISTRICT: ,GWALIOR , MADHYA PRADESH Similarly, Addressee Left. and Insufficient Address Left without instruction. have been accepted as completing service. RUNKI KUMARI S/D/W/Thru:- HARENDRA KUMAR SINGH : QUARTER NO 1082, SECTOR VI, B P O AND P S SECTOR VI, BOKARO, , DISTRICT: BOKARO ,BOKARO * , JHARKHAND vs SURAJ VALRAJ S/D/W/Thru:- MATA SHARAN VISHWKARMA : QR NO 318, STREET 12, SECTOR IX, P S HARALA, DISTT BOKARO, , DISTRICT: BOKARO ,BOKARO * , JHARKHAND
Courts recognize addressee left without instruction as sufficient evidence of tendered service. In MAGMA FINCORP LTD. VS. ASHOK KUMAR, such endorsements confirmed valid service. Ajibar Rahaman VS Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Company Ltd. - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 820 The mere claim of non-receipt does not suffice; concrete evidence is needed.
Supporting cases abound:- Notices returned with ‘addressee left without instruction’ were deemed served. SHEKHAR GUPTA S/D/W/Thru:- LATE SHRI V D GUPTA : R/O C-6/57, SDA, NEW DELHI-110016 , DISTRICT: DELHI ,NEW DELHI , DELHI vs COL RAM SINGH S/D/W/Thru:- LATE CAPT H S OBEROI : KANINA HOUSE, REWARI , HARYANA , DISTRICT: REWARI ,REWARI , HARYANA- Tracking reports showing addressee left without instruction upheld service presumptions. SWETA GUPTA S/D/W/Thru:- ANURAG GUPTA : GALI NO 2, MADHU VIHAR COLONY, DELHI ROAD, REWARI, HARYANA , DISTRICT: REWARI ,REWARI , HARYANA vs ANURAG GUPTA S/D/W/Thru:- GIRISH KUMAR GUPTA : FLAT NO 902, P P E TOWER, OMAX PALM GREENS, NEW GREATER NOIDA, DISTIRCT GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR ,GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR * , UTTAR PRADESHPRIYAMVADA SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- RAHUL SHARMA : HOUSE NO 312, SECTOR 19 PART I HUDA POLICE STATION CIVIL LINE KAITHAL , DISTRICT: KAITHAL ,KAITHAL , HARYANA vs RAHUL SHARMA S/D/W/Thru:- BHIKA RAM SHARMA : HOUSE NO 6377 G BLOCK AEROCITY MOHALI , DISTRICT: MOHALI ,MOHALI , PUNJAB- Even in winding-up petitions, addressee left remarks validated notices sent to registered addresses. HOTLINE TELETUBES AND COMPONENTS LIMITED VS A. S. IMPEX LIMITED - 2003 Supreme(Del) 559HOTLINE TELETUBES AND COMPONENTS LIMITED VS A. S. IMPEX LIMITED - 2003 Supreme(Del) 568
The addressee can challenge this by proving the endorsement is false—e.g., the notice was never tendered or the remark manipulated. Mere denial is insufficient; supporting evidence like affidavits or postal records is required. Union Of India VS Mohd. Nazim - 1979 0 Supreme(SC) 438
For example:- If proven the postal peon did not visit, service fails.- In cases like eviction under Delhi Rent Control Act, courts scrutinized service amid multiple disputes but upheld presumptions absent proof. ISSAR NENU MAL AJBANI AND I. N. AJBARNI VS NARAIN DASS P. GODWANI - 2004 Supreme(Del) 806
Exceptions include:- Endorsements like not found or refused may require affixation if non-receipt is proven.- Indeterminate addresses or unserved returns (e.g., 'addressee left') might prompt fresh steps. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANR vs BIDYADHAR TANTI AND 38 ORS - 2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7206Ranbir Singh Dhanjal VS Aruna Gupta - 2009 Supreme(SC) 1900
These rules apply squarely to divorce, maintenance, or custody cases. Courts prioritize procedural efficiency, holding that left without instruction on registered receipts validates service unless rebutted. Anil Kumar Gupta VS Kausalya Devi Modi - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1103
Real-world examples:- In a specific performance suit, summons to the same address as prior notices were deemed proper despite avoidance claims. Shakeeruddin VS Eknath Patil - 2021 Supreme(Kar) 888- Gauhati High Court directed fresh service only where A/D failed entirely, affirming postal reports otherwise. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANR vs BIDYADHAR TANTI AND 38 ORS - 2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7206
A key precedent: Service is valid if properly addressed, even if acknowledged by someone else, per Harihar Banerji v. Ramsashi Roy (1918 SCC OnLine PC 58). This creates a strong rebuttable presumption. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANR vs BIDYADHAR TANTI AND 38 ORS - 2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 7206
While robust, the presumption isn't absolute:- False Endorsement: Prove manipulation or non-tendering. Union Of India VS Mohd. Nazim - 1979 0 Supreme(SC) 438- Alternative Methods: If refused and non-receipt shown, use publication or affixation.- Burden of Proof: Lies with the disputing party; denial alone fails. Union Of India VS Mohd. Nazim - 1979 0 Supreme(SC) 438- Address Changes: Notices to official addresses before updates are valid. HOTLINE TELETUBES AND COMPONENTS LIMITED VS A. S. IMPEX LIMITED - 2003 Supreme(Del) 559
In company law or eviction, similar logic applies—e.g., statutory notices under Companies Act with addressee left upheld winding-up admissions. HOTLINE TELETUBES AND COMPONENTS LIMITED VS A. S. IMPEX LIMITED - 2003 Supreme(Del) 568
For plaintiffs/senders:- Ensure accurate addressing, prepaid registration.- Retain tracking reports and endorsements as evidence.
For defendants/addressees:- Gather proof like residency affidavits or postal inquiries to rebut.- Act promptly if disputing ex parte proceedings.
In matrimonial matters, document everything to avoid delays.
In summary, a post office remark of addressee left without instruction typically amounts to proper service of summons in matrimonial disputes, invoking a strong legal presumption. Courts shift the burden to the recipient to disprove it with solid evidence. This streamlines proceedings but protects against abuse via rebuttal options.
Key Takeaways:- Postal endorsements create prima facie proof. Anil Kumar Gupta VS Kausalya Devi Modi - 2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 1103- Rebut with evidence, not just claims.- Applies across civil, matrimonial, and commercial matters.- Always verify addresses and track service.
Stay informed on service rules to safeguard your rights. For personalized guidance, reach out to a legal expert.
#ServiceOfSummons, #MatrimonialLaw, #LegalPresumption
, “Addressee Left without instruction” in respect of Respondent No. 2. ... , “Addressee Left without instruction” in respect of Respondent to GPO, New Delhi with postal remarks, “Addressee Left without instruction” in respect of Respondent No. 2. ... Post.
It has been observed that Registry mentions in the office report that where the notice is returned as ‘refusal’ is complete/proper service, whereas when it is returned as ‘unclaimed’ is not proper service/incomplete service. ... As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above decisions, when a notice is served to the proper address of the addressee, it shall be deemed to be served unless contrary is proved. Thus, when the notice is returned as uncl....
“Addressee Left.” ... “Insufficient Address Left without instruction.” ... Post on 09.12.2019. ... Service of notice is complete. ... Registrar Court with this Office Report.
‘M/s Crystal Pharmaceuticals’ has been received back with postal remarks ‘addressee left without instruction’. ... ‘M/s Crystal Pharmaceuticals’ through Speed Post as well as through Mr. V.P.S. ... ‘M/s Crystal Pharmaceuticals’ has been received from High Court with remarks “Served”, but no one has entered appearance on its behalf so far. ... It is further submitted that as per speed post track report (copy enclosed) show cause notice Cert....
“addressee left without instruction”. ... Accordingly, notice to the sole respondent on both addresses was issued ...Respondent OFFICE ... It is submitted that as per tracking report of postal authority, notice has not been delivered to the sole respondent on first address with postal remarks
“addressee left without instruction”. ... Accordingly, notice to the sole respondent on both addresses was issued ...Respondent OFFICE ... It is submitted that as per tracking report of postal authority, notice has not been delivered to the sole respondent on first address with postal remarks
left”. ... “addressee left, hence, returned to sender”. ... Post on 4th May, 2018. ... Post on 1st August, 2018 at the second (fresh) address. ... Counsel for the Petitioner is reported to the Hon’ble Judge in Chambers with this Office Report.
On a perusal of the office note dated 20.05.2024 reveals that notice was issued to the respondent Nos. 1 to 39 by registered post with A/D on 13.03.2024. ... As far as the respondent No. 23 is concerned, the petitioners are directed to take fresh steps for service of notice upon the respondent No. 23 by registered post with A/D as well as by usual Court process through the office of the Hon’ble Registrar, Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Permanent Bench, within ... 7 (seven) days, considering the fact that....
as “Addressee left without instruction”. ... notice has been received back from both the respondent with 2 and fresh show cause notice has been issued to both the respondents on 05.12.2019 through speed post ... RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0;padding:0;top:196pt;left
Also, as addressee can easily avoid receiving the letter addressed to him without specifically refusing to receive it. He can so manipulate matters that it gets returned to the sender with vague endorsements such as "not found", "not in station", "addressee has left" and so on. ... Shiv Rani and others, AIR 1981 SC 1284, section 27 of the General Clauses Act, ",........raises a presumption of due service or proper service if the document sought to be served is sent by....
Hence the plaintiff is constrained to file a suit for specific performance of contract. The plaintiff in the cause-title has shown the same address as shown in Ex.P10, wherein the summons has been served on the defendant on the very same address. After the receipt of postal cover, the plaintiff once again issued legal notice dated 19.09.2009, as per Ex.P6 showing the address as Shakeeruddin, S/o Md. Zairuddin, R/o House No.4-2-10, Opp. Mumtaz Function Hall, Noor Khan Taleem, Proper Bidar. The defendant is purposely avoiding to execute the registered sale deed of suit land in favour of plaint....
It would be clear from the memo that the address relating to Canada is indeterminate and the efforts to serve the appellant on his address in Chandigarh have remained futile. The office report shows that the notices sent have been received unserved with the remarks 'addressee left'.
While in the case of service through publication, a copy of the newspaper was sent under UPC at the address of the respondent. ( 3 ) IT is contended by counsel for the petitioner that the service of summons was effected by registered post, ordinary post and also by publication. As far as service through registered post and ordinary service is concerned, they were returned with the remarks addressee left without address. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the service of summons was not effected, therefore, there was no reason for the learned Tribunal to allow....
Same also received back unserved with similar remarks. The said notice was received back from the post office with the remarks "addressee left". ( 5 ) STATUTORY notice under Section 433 of the Companies Act was sent to the respondent on 30. 10. 2001. Another copy of the notice was dispatched to the respondent through registered A. D. post on 6. 11. 2001.
( 5 ) STATUTORY notice under Section 433 of the Companies Act was sent to the respondent on 30. 10. 2001. Another copy of the notice was dispatched to the respondent through registered A. D. post on 6. 11. 2001. Same also received back unserved with similar remarks. The said notice was received back from the post office with the remarks "addressee left".
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
