Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MOHAN LAL versus MAHABIR PRASAD

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Mohan Lal v. Mahabir Prasad - SECOND APPEAL No. 1108 of 1982 [2006] RD-AH 20047 (27 November 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. S.P. Mehrotra, J.

Order on

Civil Misc. (Publication in Newspaper)

Application No. 241105 of 2006

The aforementioned Application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiffs-appellants, interalia, praying that direction be given for service of notice on the respondent no.7 (Satya Prakash Sahu) by publication in the newspaper.

The aforementioned Application is supported by an affidavit, sworn on 12.11.2006.

From a perusal of the averments made in the aforementioned Application and its accompanying affidavit as also from a perusal of the record, it appears that pursuant to the order dated 26.4.2005 passed on Civil Misc. (Impleadment) Application No. 229414 of 2004, Satya Prakash Sahu was impleaded as the respondent no.7 in the Second Appeal.

The said order dated 26.4.2005 further directed for issuance of notice to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7).

It further appears that pursuant to the said order dated 26.4.2005, notice was issued to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7) by Registered Post A.D. fixing 4.7.2005. However, the said notice was returned unserved with the Report of the Postal Department to the effect that the addressee had left the house.

In the circumstances, it appears that Civil Misc. (Supply of New Address) Application  No. 237218 of 2005 was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs-appellants.

It was, interalia, prayed in the said Civil Misc. (Supply of New Address) Application No. 237218 of 2005 that notice to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7), pursuant to the said order dated 26.4.2005, be sent at the new address of the said Satya Prakash Sahu, as mentioned in the prayer clause of the said Civil Misc. (Supply of New Address) Application No. 237218 of 2005.

Having regard to the averments made in the said Civil Misc. (Supply of New Address) Application No. 237218 of 2005 and its accompanying affidavit, and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants, the Court by its order dated 24.1.2006 directed that notice to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7), pursuant to the said order dated 26.4.2005, be sent by Registered Post A.D. at the address mentioned in the prayer clause of the said Civil Misc. (Supply of New Address) Application  No. 237218 of 2005.

Notice was directed to be issued fixing 21.4.2006.

The Office submitted its Report dated 22.3.2006, interalia, praying that some other date be fixed for issuance of notice pursuant to the said order dated 24.1.2006.

In view of the said Office Report, the Court by its order dated 4.7.2006 directed that notice, as per the directions given in the order dated 24.1.2006, would be sent fixing 26.10.2006.

It further appears that pursuant to the said order dated 26.4.2005 read with the orders dated 24.1.2006 and 4.7.2006, notice was sent to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7).

The Office Report dated 26.10.2006 shows that the said notice sent by Registered Post A.D. fixing 26.10.2006, has been received back with the following endorsement made by the Postal Department:

I have heard Shri Dheeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants, and perused the record.

Shri Dheeraj Srivastava submits that the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7) is not accepting the notice intentionally in order to prolong the proceedings. It is submitted that in the circumstances, direction be given for service of notice on the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7) by publication in the newspaper.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances mentioned above, and having considered the submissions made by Shri Dheeraj Srivastava, learned counsel for the plaintiffs-appellants, I am of the opinion that it is in the interest of justice that the prayer made in the aforementioned Civil Misc. (Publication in Newspaper) Application No.241105 of 2006 be granted.

It is noteworthy that notices were twice sent to the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no. 7) by Registered Post A.D. but the same have been received back.

In view of the above, Civil Misc. (Publication in Newspaper) Application No.241105 of 2006 is allowed.

Let notice on the said Satya Prakash Sahu (respondent no.7) be served by publication in the newspaper. Notice will be published in one issue of the English Daily Newspaper "Northern India Patrika", published from the District Allahabad, and in one issue of Hindi Daily Newspaper "Dainik Jagran" published from the District Allahabad.

The above publication will be made on or before 29.1.2007. The notice will be published fixing 1.3.2007.

List on 1.3.2007.

Dt. 27.11.2006

Safi (S.A.1108/1982)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.