Skip to content


Subramania Pillai Vs. Subramania Ayyar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1898)ILR21Mad419
AppellantSubramania Pillai
RespondentSubramania Ayyar
Cases ReferredBhomshetti v. Umabai I.L.R.
Excerpt:
civil procedure code - act xiv of 1882, sections 78, 80, 32--substituted service--duty of process-server. - 1. we do not think that the service in this case was proper. mere temporary absence of the person to be served does not justify the process-server affixing the summons to the door [bhomshetti v. umabai i.l.r. 21 bom. 223. it is the duty of the peon to take some pains to find out the person to be served, so that, if possible, personal service may be effected.2. we must set aside the decree and direct that the subordinate judge do restore the suit to his file and dispose of it according to law. costs will abide and follow the result.
Judgment:

1. We do not think that the service in this case was proper. Mere temporary absence of the person to be served does not justify the process-server affixing the summons to the door [Bhomshetti v. Umabai I.L.R. 21 Bom. 223. It is the duty of the peon to take some pains to find out the person to be served, so that, if possible, personal service may be effected.

2. We must set aside the decree and direct that the Subordinate Judge do restore the suit to his file and dispose of it according to law. Costs will abide and follow the result.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //