The fact regarding having written this letter to the respondent has been mentioned by the claimant in para 12(xxviii) of the statement of claim and copy of this letter has also been annexed as Annx. xxviii alongwith the documents, Vol- II, filed by the claimant. The respondent in their reply to the statement of claim in the corresponding sub-para of para 12 has not denied the receipt of this letter. In this para the respondent has stated that the letter in question (notice dated 02.07.2010) was delivered to the claimant at the same address. Though, from the facts stated in para 81, herein-above, it is evident that the notice dated 02.07.2010, was not addressed to the claimant at the complete address given by the claimant in his letter dated 28.11.2008. In fact, the said notice was sent on the address 'M/s.Spiral Services, Entrance Gate, NSM, Azadpur, Delhi- 110033' whereas the complete address as given by the claimant in his letter dated 28.11.2008 is: 'SPIRAL SERVICES, APMC control Room, Entrance Gate no. I, New Sabzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi-110033 '. From the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the address mentioned by the respondent on the notice, the words 'APMC Control Room' are missing, instead of the words 'Entrance Gate No.01', the words 'Entrance Gate' only are mentioned and instead of the words 'New Sabzi Mandi ', the words „NSM‟ have been mentioned. From these facts, it is established that the address noted on the regd. cover by the respondent was not complete and proper. It is true that under Section 22 of the General Clauses Act, 1987, and Section 114 (f) of the Indian Evidence Act, a presumption of service can be drawn in case a letter is sent by properly addressing, prepaying and posting it by regd post. In this connection reference may be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case: M/s.Madan & Co., Supra, which has also been relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the respondent. In this judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the
