 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 140 4.4. A case from Karnataka.- A Karnataka case,1 though it seems to have arisen before the amendment of 1976, is also worth noting. The case related to a suit for the recovery of money. An ex parte decree was passed on the basis of a summons sent by post under Order V, rule 10 of the Code (as amended in Mysore), which permitted service by registered post in certain circumstances.2 1. B. Padmavathi Rai v. Parvathiamma, AIR 1976 Kam 97 (K. Jagrulatha Shetty, J.). 2. Order V, rule 10 amended in Mysore (later Karnataka) (cf. para. 2.6, supra).    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back