How to Serve Summons on Defendant Outside India

2023 0 Supreme(Kar) 524

Since defendant No.9 was not residing in India, even if summons was published in the newspaper, it cannot be held to be sufficient service. ... When there was a report of the process server of the court stating that defendant No.9 was not in India, the plaintiff ought to have taken proper steps to ascertain the address of defendant No.9 and see that the suit summons was duly served on defendant No.9, where defendant No.9 was residing. ... The plaintiff was also aware ....

could not Re enforced against the defendant by an action in this country. ...     Action on a foreign judgment-Defendant born in South India, Rut carrying on business and residing in Colombo-Action brought in Bombay- Presumption as to jurisdiction of foreign Court-Is defendant Round by the Bombay judgment? ... in the country of his residence. ... The plaintiffs sued the defendant a Natukottai Chetty, " a subject of British India," who was residing#....

In view of the fact that the defendant has been residing outside Ceylon from April, 1948, has this Court jurisdiction to hear the plaintiff's action ? The fourth issue was heard as a preliminary issue of law. ... Section 69 only applies to persons domiciled in the country who are at the moment abroad. It does not apply to persons who are permanently outside the country. H. V. Perera, Q.C., replied. Cur. adv. vult. July 10, 1952. ROSE C.J. ... Thereafter the defendant went to Australia. Summons w....

To serve the writ on a defendant residing out of jurisdiction would constitute an encroachment on the sovereignty of the country where the defendant resides. ... Hence the provision in the RHC that only a notice of the writ and not the writ itself should be served on a defendant residing outside the jurisdiction. ... It was not meant to fetter the discretion of the Registrar to grant the extention where as in this case the defendant was re....

High Court Malaya, Kuala Lumpur

[28] To serve the writ on a defendant residing out of jurisdiction would constitute an encroachment on the sovereignty of the country where the defendant resides. ... Hence the provision in the RHC that only a notice of the writ and not the writ itself should be served on a defendant residing outside the jurisdiction. ... It was not meant to fetter the discretion of the registrar to grant the extention where as in this case the defendant was #HL_STA....

[28] To serve the writ on a defendant residing out of jurisdiction would constitute an encroachment on the sovereignty of the country where the defendant resides. ... Hence the provision in the RHC that only a notice of the writ and not the writ itself should be served on a defendant residing outside the jurisdiction. ... It was not meant to fetter the discretion of the registrar to grant the extention where as in this case the defendant was #HL_STA....

(a) by a consular authority in that country; or (b) by the Government or judicial authorities of that country; or (c) by any other authority designed in respect of that country, under the Hague Convention, shall be evidence ... This leave is supposed to be used to serve a notice of writ of summons on the defendant at the addresses mentioned in Dubai and/or in reading. 4.

(a) by a consular authority in that country; or (b) by the Government or judicial authorities of that country; or (c) by any other authority designed in respect of that country, under the Hague Convention, p align="

To serve the writ on a defendant residing out of jurisdiction would constitute an encroachment on the sovereignty of the country where the defendant resides. ... Hence the provision in the RHC that only a notice of the writ and not the writ itself should be served on a defendant residing outside the jurisdiction. ... It was not meant to fetter the discretion of the Registrar to grant the extention where as in this case the defendant was re....

2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1243

norms for service of summons have failed, then, the courts can order notice through substituted service by paper publication in a newspaper having wide publication in the country and area where the defendant habitually resides. ... It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since the respondent is a citizen of the Philippines and is residing in the Philippines and since the petitioner has taken all steps to see that notice to the respondent is duly served, the service of notice could not be effected. ... Abdul Majeed, ....

2021 0 Supreme(Mad) 2392

The defendant is residing on the south of the plaintiff’s property. The plaintiff was residing in Chinnaparusapalayam village, which is situated 2 kms away from the property. After made purchase, he constructed his house in one house site and left the other house site vacant, without making any development. Since a portion of the plaintiff’s property is a vacant site, the defendant asked permission from the plaintiff to dump the wooden logs and the same was refused by the plaintiff.

2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 984

Be that as it may, as admitted by the defendant, the plaintiff is found to be in the portion of the suit property, particularly, where the house is lying. The defendant himself has admitted in the written statement that it is only the plaintiff, who has been in the possession and enjoyment of the house portion lying in the suit property. According to the defendant, on his permission, the plaintiff is residing there. However, the same had been refuted by the plaintiff.

2010 0 Supreme(All) 2036

He contended that on one hand, the Trial Court while rejecting application of the petitioner took the ground that the application of petitioner has been filed just to make complication in the suit and adopting delaying tactics, but on the other hand, from perusal of extracts of ordersheet it is clear that the respondents are responsible for delaying the matter. The petitioner purchased the property in suit from respondent No.5 who is at present residing out of the country. He further contended that the petitioner is the bona fide purchaser of the land in question. He furthe....

2010 0 Supreme(Bom) 321

The evidence on record establishes the fact that defendant Nos.2 and 3 are in possession of the suit premises exclusively and defendant No.1 only visits them every few years. In the present case, the landlord has established the fact that defendant Nos.2 and 3 were in possession of the suit premises exclusively. Therefore, in my view, the submissions of Mr.Dani cannot be accepted. Defendant No.1 who was the tenant had left the country and was residing in London.

2001 0 Supreme(AP) 1341

As seen from the facts and circumstances, the wife of the defendant has not furnished the address of her husband and therefore the question of service of summons through post on the defendant who is residing outside the country does not arise. Then only the issuance of summons to the defendant who is outside the country arises. The only issue to be decided in this revision is whether at the instance of the wife of the defendant, the Court is entitled to recall the order passed on 16-11-2000 and 24-11-2000 on the ground that service of summons, notice and injunction order on....