Interim application in a first appeal. Notice to respondent no. 1 was returned unserved with a Bailiff's report that notice was pasted on his door after he could not be found. The Registrar held service good under Order V Rule 17 CPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Interim Application No. 7673 of 2024 in First Appeal (ST) No. 3570 of 2024.
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders appearance, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders
CORAM : SHRI S. R. AGRAWAL REGISTRAR (JUDL.II)
Date : 01/08/2024.
None present.
Office remark shows that Notice issued to the respondent no. 1 on 14/05/2024 is returned with Bailiff’s remark dt. 06/06/2024, “At the time of service, respondent no. 1 was not found. His father was present. On inquiry, he informed that his son resides in Mumbai and he does not know about his residence. He further informed that respondent no. 1 occasionally visits at the address mentioned in the notice. Therefore, copy of notice was pasted on the door of the respondent no. 1”.
The report below notice is on affidavit of concerned Bailiff. Hence, service of notice upon respondent no. 1 be treated as good service vide Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Respondent no. 1 (First Appeal ST No. 3570 of 2024)
S. R. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
