Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Calcutta High Court

Parameswaran Unni vs G. Kannan And Anr. Reported In (2017) 5 ... on 16 July, 2019

Author: Arindam Sinha

Bench: Arindam Sinha

                                ORDER SHEET
                             GA No.1086 of 2019
                                     With
                              PLA No.232 of 2018
                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                     Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction
                                ORIGINAL SIDE


                              IN THE GOODS OF:
                            UMA DAS SHARMA(DEC.)


  BEFORE:
  The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

Date: 16th July, 2019.

Appearance:

Mr. Ayan Dutta, Adv.
Mr. Avishake Bhar, Adv.
The Court: This application in this Probate and Letters of Administration case has been listed under heading "To be Mentioned" at instance of executor.
Mr. Ayan Dutta, learned advocate appears on behalf of executor and submits, prayer is for service on special citation, upon two nephews of testatrix, be treated as good service and consequent direction upon the department to issue 'no caveat' certificate. He demonstrates from the Will addresses given therein of the two nephews, under sub-clauses (iii) and (iv) in paragraph 7. Drawing attention to, inter alia, report dated 14th January, 2019 of Deputy Sheriff, regarding postal articles so addressed to these two nephews having been returned bearing endorsement unclaimed and N/C, he submits, this be presumed to be good service. He relies on judgment of Supreme Court in N. 2 Parameswaran Unni versus G. Kannan and Anr. reported in (2017) 5 SCC 737, paragraph 15, in which following has said:-
"This Court in a catena of cases has held that when a notice is sent by registered post and is returned with postal endorsement "refused" or "not available in the house" or "house locked" or "shop closed" or "addressee not in station", due service has to be presumed. Though in the process of interpretation right of an honest lender cannot be defeated as has happened in this case. From the perusal of relevant sections it is clear that generally there is no bar under the NI Act to send a reminder notice to the drawer of the cheque and usually such notice cannot be construed as an admission of non-service of the first notice by the appellant as has happened in this case."

He demonstrates service effected on others named in the special citation.

Court is satisfied that there has been good service. There will be order in terms of prayers (a) and (b) of the application disposing of the same.

(ARINDAM SINHA, J.) sp/