Applicants sought leave for substituted service of notice on respondents 5 and 6 in an original side appeal after the earlier counsel withdrew by memo. The court permitted publication of notice in a widely circulated newspaper with a hearing date, and posted the appeal.
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.
CMP No.20127 of 2024 in OSA No.98 of 2024
S.S.SUNDAR, J. and
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
This application has been filed to permit the applicants to serve notice on the sixth respondent by means of substituted service in the original side appeal.
Though M/s.S.M.S.Shriram Narayanan, was engaged as counsel, by respondents 5 and 6, the said counsel has filed a memo stating that they are no longer representing respondents 5 and 6. They request that their names may be deleted as representing counsel for respondents 5 and 6.
In the said circumstances, this court is required to issue notice to respondents 5 and 6. Therefore, to avoid time-delay, the applicants are permitted to serve notice on respondents 5 and 6 by means of substituted service.
The applicants are directed to publish notice in any newspaper having wide circulation in the locality on or before 13.09.2024, specifically mentioning that the appeal will be listed for hearing on 30.09.2024.
Post on 30.09.2024.
tar
S.S.SUNDAR
K.RAJASEKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
