HEENA ASSOCIATES Vs. MEENAL T. KAMBLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 9th August 2021, I made the following order:

(2.) Ms Kamble is not present today either physically or online. There is an Affidavit of Service tendered by Mr Narula. It is made by one Sachin Nawlu a Court and service clerk engaged with M/s Jhangiani, Narula and Associates. The deponent says that on instructions of Mr Anuuj Narula, he attempted to serve a copy of my order of 9th August 2021 on the Defendant at her address at Goregaon (East). At the entrance of the building the security person called her flat on the intercom. The Defendant answered. On being told that the person downstairs was a clerk from the offices of M/s Jhangiani, Narula and Associates, she asked the security person to say that she was unavailable. The clerk then went up to the flat on the second floor. No one answered. He waited for 15 minutes. He finally left after leaving the notice and a copy of the order in a packet that he hung on the handle of the safety door.

(3.) Paragraph 5 of the Affidavit of Service says that the deponent of the Affidavit forwarded a scanned copy of the notice attaching a copy my order to the Defendant at her two email addresses from the email id of Anuuj Narula at 1.06 pm. This email has not been returned.