HANUMANDAS S O BAJRANGDAS GUPTA Vs. BAARKHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD.

(2.) THE short question, that arises for consideration in this petition, is whether the suit filed by the non-applicant/plaintiff deserves to be dismissed, on the ground that there was non-compliance of Order 5, Rule 2, read with Order 39, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code), as contended by the applicant.

(3.) AFTER the trial Court issued process, notices were sent to the applicant by three modes; the first one was the usual service, i. e. , through bailiff; the second one was by Registered Post, A. D. , which was admittedly received by the applicant/defendant; and the third mode of service was after the applicant/defendant had put in his appearance, through the Advocate. In so far as the service through bailiff is concerned, it is stated by the applicant that, only copy of the summons was served without the copy of the plaint and the annexures. With regard to service by Registered Post A. D. , it is stated by the non-applicant that besides notice, copy of the plaint, annexures etc. was sent and the same has been duly received by the applicant. It is not in dispute that after the applicant had put in appearance through his Advocate, who, in turn, complained to the Advocate for the non-applicant about non-service of the copy of the plaint and annexures alongwith the summons notice received through bailiff by the applicant, immediately thereafter the Counsel for the non-applicant/plaintiff took steps to furnish the entire record to the Counsel for the applicant/defendant, but the applicants Advocate refused to accept the same.