B D B PRASAD Vs. BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the ex parte order passed on 28-1-1987 by the learned District Judge, Rajgarh (Bisora) in Original Suit No. 4/ 8 of 1981.

(2.) It is the grievance of the appellant that summons was served on defendant's minor son named Solomon on 6-3-82. On that date he was below 18 years of age, and hence, he cannot be treated as "adult". He further pointed out that no copy of the plaint was annexed with the said summons. Shri Sharma made reference to certified copy of the summons in that context for substantiating the argument.

(3.) Shri Namjoshi, counsel for the respondent No. 1 contended that a boy more than 16 years of age is treated as adult and service of the summons of the suit on him is proper.service. He tried to justify the impugned order, on the basis of the word "adult".