9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Setting aside ex parte decree due to improper service of summons.
In this case, the main issue revolves around the application to set aside an ex parte decree on the grounds of improper service of summons. The applicant argues that the writ of summons was not duly served, and she was unaware of the suit until after the decree had been passed. The suit was against a firm, and the applicant claims that the business conducted under the firm name was actually owned by her deceased husband, and she only managed it for collecting outstandings. However, there are conflicting affidavits regarding the status of the firm and its partners, making it difficult to ascertain the true nature of the business. The summons was sent by registered post, but the applicant presents evidence suggesting that the summons was not delivered to the correct address of the firm. Regarding the legal aspects, a suit can be brought against a firm in its firm name even if it is dissolved, as long as the liability arose when the firm was active. However, for proper service, under Order XXX, Rule 3, the summons must be served on a partner or at the principal place where the business was conducted. If the firm no longer exists, service should be on a partner. Additionally, Chapter VIII of the High Court Rules allows for service by registered post, but it must align with the requirements of Order XXX, Rule 3. In this case, the registered post was addressed to the firm at its assumed business address, but the applicant successfully argues that the service was not done correctly. Consequently, the judge orders to set aside the ex parte decree. The judge also hints at the plaintiff considering amending the charges against specific individuals for liability. The costs incurred and the costs of the application are to be determined based on the outcome of the retrial, emphasizing the importance of proper service and adherence to procedural rules in legal proceedings.
|
