The tribunal directed the appellant's counsel to re-serve notices on respondents 2, 3, and 4 via newspaper publication due to returned notices indicating insufficient or non-existent addresses at the given locations.
Counsel directed to serve notices on respondents 2-4 via newspaper publication within 10 days.
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.
Appeal Dy. No. 133/2022 Date: 23.09.2022
Shivalik Mercantile Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sunder Devi & Ors.
Present: Shri Raj Kumar Tiwari, counsel for the appellant,
Pursuant to the earlier order dated 05.07.2022 of this Tribunal, notices were issued to the respondents, but the office report dated 22.09.2022 shows that notices sent to the respondent No. 1 have returned back with endorsement “insufficient address” and notices sent to the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 have also returned back with endorsement “on given address no such person reside”, therefore, the learned counsel for the appellant is directed to take fresh steps within 10 days for service of notice upon the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 through paper publication in the newspapers having wide circulation in the area. Affidavit of service along with proof of publication be filed by the next date.
List this case on 16.12.2022 for service.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
VN Giri
Shivalik Mercantile Co-Operative Bank Ltd.
Smt. Sunder Devi
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 4
R. D. Khare
V. N. Giri
As recorded by the court registry
10 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
