High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Rudra Deo Singh v. Narendra Bahadur Singh & Others - SECOND APPEAL No. 192 of 1983  RD-AH 18478 (1 November 2006)
Hon. S.P. Mehrotra, J.
(1) Civil Misc. ( Delay Condonation ) Application No. 118401 of 2001.
(2) Civil Misc. ( Substitution ) Application No. 118403 of 2001.
Case called out in the revised list.
Miss. Merun Dey , holding brief for Sri A.N. Bhargava, learned counsel for the applicant in the aforementioned applications is present. However, none is present on behalf of the defendants-respondents.
The aforementioned applications have been filed consequent to the deaths of Ram Asrey Singh (plaintiff-appellant no.1/1) and Mst. Basmati Devi (plaintiff-appellant no. 1/3).
By the order dated 22.3.2005, notices were directed to be issued on the aforementioned applications.
It appears that the notices were accordingly issued to the defendants-respondents nos. 1,2 and 3 on the aforementioned applications.
The Office submitted its report dated 14.11.2005 in regard to service of the said notices.
In view of the said Office Report dated 14.11.2005, the Court passed an order dated 16.11.2005.
It was , interalia, noted in the said order dated 16.11.2005 that the defendant-respondent no. 3 was represented by Sri Anil Tiwari, Advocate.
The said order dated 16.11.2005, interalia, further directed for issuance of fresh notices by Registered Post A.D. , to the defendants-respondents nos. 1 and 2.
It further appears that the notices were accordingly issued by Registered Post A.D., to the defendants-respondents nos. 1 and 2.
The Office submitted its Report dated 21.1.2006 in regard to service of the said notices.
In view of the said Office Report dated 21.1.2006, the Court by its order dated 24.3.2006, held service of notice on the defendant-respondent no.1 to be sufficient.
As regards service of notice on the defendant-respondent no.2, it was, interalia, noticed in the said order dated 24.3.2006 that the notice sent to the defendant-respondent no. 2, had been received back unserved as the address on the envelop was incomplete.
In the circumstances, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants was granted time for taking fresh steps for issuance of notice to the defendant-respondent no. 2 by Registered Post A.D., pursuant to the said order dated 16.11.2005.
In compliance with the said order dated 24.3.2006, notice was issued to the defendant-respondent no.2 fixing 4.8.2006.
The Office has submitted its Report dated 3.8.2006 in regard to service of the said notice.
As perusal of the said Office Report dated 3.8.2006 shows that the notice sent to the defendant-respondent no.2, has been served, and the Acknowledgement Due Card has also been received back.
In view of the above, it is evident that the notices have been served on the defendants-respondents nos. 1,2 and 3.
Office is directed to submit Report as to whether any Counter Affidavit /Reply has been filed pursuant to the service of notices on the defendants -respondents in respect of the aforementioned applications.
List after four weeks.
Second Appeal No. 192/1983/aks.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.