 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 140 6.3. Order 5, rule 19A to be amended.- Our first recommendation is that order 5, rule 19A of the code of Civil Procedure, 1908 should be amended by making the declaration regarding service by registered post discretionary, instead of its being mandatory as at present in order that a litigant is insulated against injustice on account of either a lapse or mistake or on account of a fraud practised with the help of a dishonest postman motivated to make an endorsement regarding refusal. The rule, as so revised, will read as under:- "19A. (1) The court shall, in addition to and simultaneously with the issue of summons for service in the manner provided in rules 9 to 19, also direct the summons to be served by registered post addressed to the defendant or his agent empowered to accept service at the place where the defendant or his agent ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain: Provided that nothing in this sub-rule shall require the Court to issue a summons for service by registered post, where, in the circumstances of the case, the Court regards it as unnecessary. (2) When an acknowledgment purporting to be signed by the defendant or the agent or an endorsement purporting to be made by a postal employee that the defendants or the agent refused to take delivery has been received, the Court issuing the summons may declare that there has been valid service, bearing in mind the possibility of fraud or mistake on the part of the postman who might have tendered the article to a wrong person whilst in the making of the endorsement regarding refusal."    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back