Shaik Ameerunnisa vs. Parthasarathy Transports
Court:High Court of Andhra Pradesh
Judge:Hon'ble K Manmadha Rao
Case Status:Unknown Status
Order Date:26 Feb 2024
CNR:APHC010330162022
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
For Admission
Before:
Hon'ble B Krishna Mohan
Listed On:
18 Jul 2022
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No: M.A.C.M.A.No.237 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
| SI.<br>No. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br><b>NOTE</b> |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02. | 26.02.2024 | Dr. KMR,J | |
| Learned counsel for the appellant | |||
| filed proof of service and he would submit | |||
| that in <b>C.C.Alavi Haji Vs. Palapetty</b> | |||
| Muhammed and another, (2007) 6 SCC | |||
| <b>555</b> the Hon'ble Apex Court has held when | |||
| a notice is sent by Registered Post and is | |||
| returned with a postal endorsement as | |||
| "refused" or "not available in the house" or | |||
| "house locked" or "shop closed" or | |||
| "addressee not in station", the service of | |||
| notice against the party has to presumed. | |||
| As per the above judgment, notice | |||
| sent to Respondent No.4 is deemed to have | |||
| been served as per law. | |||
| It is represented by the learned | |||
| counsel for the petitioner that respondents | |||
| No.3 is not necessary party as no claim is | |||
| made against him in the appeal. | |||
| Post the matter on 04.11.2024, for | |||
| "final hearing". | |||
| Dr. KMR,J | |||
| KK |
Share This Order
Case History of Orders
Similar Case Search