High Courts

Subrahmania Pillai vs Muthukutti

Madras High Court · Decided on 10 December 1897 · Citation: (1898) 8 MLJ 84

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 104 words
1.

We do not think that the service in this case was proper. Mere temporary absence of the person to be served does not justify the process-

server affixing the summons to the door. (Bhomshetti v. Umabai, ILR 21 B. 223 It is the duty of the peon to take some pains to find out the person

to be served, so that, if possible, personal service may be effected.

2.

We must set aside the decree and direct that the Subordinate Judge do restore the suit to his file and dispose of it according to law.

3.

Costs will abide and follow the result.