Disposed¶11

Borivali Girirath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Smt. Rekhaben Jagdish Bhakta and Ors.

Bombay HC28 Jan 2025CAF/185/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Registrar (Judl-II) Bombay High Court order 13/01/2025; Civil Application 186/2024; Civil Application 185/2024; First Appeal 456/2022; substituted service; Order V Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure 1908; good service; Bailiff report; notice pasted on door; airmail notice unpaid charges; unserved respondent; last chance two weeks; dismissal for non-service; advocates Geeta Baudh, Ruchi Umrotkar, H.J. Lulia, S.R. Page.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; procedural directions only — service of notice on respondent No. 4 deemed good under Order V Rule 17 CPC, last chance of two weeks given for service on respondent No. 6, and airmail charges for notice to respondent No. 3 to be paid within two weeks with the notice returnable by 10 weeks; Civil Applications otherwise kept pending. ¶11

Borivali Girirath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. vs Smt. Rekhaben Jagdish Bhakta and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the service of notice effected upon respondent No. 4 (notice returned with the Bailiff's report of absence and notice pasted on the door) constitutes good service. +2 more

¶8

Court's answer

Service of notice upon respondent No. 4 is treated as good service vide Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The learned advocate for the applicant is directed to take appropriate steps for service of notice upon the unserved respondent No. 6 within two weeks (last chance); on failure, necessary orders including dismissal shall be passed on the next date.

¶7

Key takeaways

The applicant is directed to pay the necessary airmail charges for issuing notice to respondent No. 3 within 02 weeks without fail; on failure, necessary orders including dismissal of the Civil Applications shall be passed on the next date; if the charges are paid, notice to respondent No. 3 shall issue, returnable by 10 weeks.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Registrar (Judl-II), High Court of Judicature at Bombay, order dated 13/01/2025 in Civil Applications Nos. 186 and 185 of 2024 (in First Appeal No. 456 of 2022): (i) service of notice upon respondent No. 4 declared good service under Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, following the Bailiff's report dated 07/12/2024 of absence and pasted notice; (ii) applicant given a last chance of two weeks to effect service on unserved respondent No. 6, failing which orders including dismissal may follow; (iii) applicant directed to pay airmail charges for issuing notice to respondent No. 3 within two weeks, notice to issue returnable by 10 weeks, failing which dismissal of the Civil Applications may be ordered.

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 186 OF 2024 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 185 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 456 OF 2022

¶3

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s order appearance, Court’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders

¶4

CORAM : SHRI S.R. AGRAWAL REGISTRAR (JUDL -II)

¶5

DATE : 13/01/2025

¶6

Adv. Geeta Baudh i/by Adv. H.J. Lulia present for the Applicant Adv. Ruchi Umrotkar i/by Adv. S.R. Page present for the Applicant

¶7

The notice issued to respondent No. 6 is returned unserved. Hence, the learned advocate for the applicant is directed to take appropriate steps for service of notice upon above unserved respondent within two weeks (last chance). On failure, necessary order including dismissal shall be passed on the next date.

¶8

The office remark shows that notice issued to respondent No. 4 on 07/08/2024 is returned with Bailiff’s remark dt. 07/12/2024 “At the time of service, the respondent No. 4 was not found and his house was locked. On inquiry, it was informed that respondent No. 4 is gone out and will return back in the eventing” Therefore, as per Hon’ble Court’s order, notice was pasted on the conspicuous part of the doors”. The report below notice is on the affidavit of concerned bailiff.

¶9

Hence, service of notice upon respondent No. 4 be

¶10

treated as good service vide Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶11

The office remark disloses that notice issued to respondent No. 3 by Airmail on 07.08.2024 is yet to be received. Therefore the learned advocate for the applicant is directed to pay necessary airmail charges for issuing notice to respondent No. 3 within 02 weeks without fail. On failure, necessary order including dismissal of Civil Applications shall be passed on the next date. If aimail charges paid, issue notice to respondent No. 3, returnable by 10 weeks.

¶12

Sd/REGISTRAR (JUDL-II)

¶13

sat-R(J-II)-13.01.2025

Borivali Girirath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Smt. Rekhaben Jagdish Bhakta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Borivali Girirath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Smt. Rekhaben Jagdish Bhakta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Everest Holdings Limited vs the Registrar of Trade Marks

Vijaykumar v Iyer Liquidator of Aditya Birla Idea Payments Bank Ltd(in Liquidation) vs Registrar of Companies(Mumbai)

Shri Rahul Mulji Patel and Another vs Shri. Nanasaheb Chindu Vadhate and Others

Wacom Co.Ltd vs the Registrar of Trade Marks

Bisleri International Private Limited vs Mahananda Foods Private Limited

Arvind T. Vaidya (Deceased) through Lrs. Suhas Vaidya and Ors. vs Himmatlal v. Shah and Othrs