Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

11. But the misconception with which the Tribunal started seems to have persisted. They referred to and purported to rely upon the decision of the Rangoon High Court in the case of '1935 Rang 144 (AIR V 22) (A)', in complete disregard of-the fact that the service in that case had been effected by a Process-server and was not service by registered post at all. It need hardly be pointed out that the considerations by which the legal sufficiency of service by registered post has to be judged are entirely different from those which apply to service through or by a peon or a Process-server. One cannot, therefore, derive any assistance from the Tribunal's treatment of the question which they had before them.