Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.36 seconds)
Documents citing P. Sen (Engineering) Pvt. Ltd. vs Delite Builders P. Ltd. And Others on 15 July, 1992

Saveena Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs Kalatex And Ors. on 2 May, 2007

15. The decision in P. Sen (Engneering) (Supra) can at the most be treated as an authority on the interpretation of Rule 3 of Order 30. The said case only lays down that the summons though required to be served 'upon' the partners are not compulsorily required to be served "personally" on them. Summons may be served upon any person expressly or impliedly authorised to receive summons or letters on behalf of the partner or at the principle place of business.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - V Sanghi - Full Document

M/S Aireff Detox Inc vs Modern Terry Towels Limited on 9 July, 2015

10. The decision cited by the learned Counsel for the Applicant in the Page 6 of 9 C/AO/408/2013 ORDER case of P Sen (Engineering) Pvt. Limited v. Delite Builders P Limited reported in AIR 1993 (Cal) 28 however stand on a different footing. It was the case where the court considered whether in every case pertaining to Order 30 Rule 3 of CPC, the summons must be accepted by the partner himself. It was observed that in a given case, in presence of the partner, the summons may be tendered by the court bailiff under instructions audibly given by the partner to accept the same, in such a case it cannot be stated that there was no service of summons on the partner. Apparently, such facts do not arise in the present case.
Gujarat High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A Kureshi - Full Document

Shri Ram Avtar Gupta vs M/S Sri Ganganagar Coop. Cotton on 22 January, 2010

6. The law on the point is well settled. The service of summons at the address of the company/society is good service. (Reference may be made to AIR 1993 Calcutta 28; 32 - P.Sen (Engg.) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Delite Builders (P) Ltd.). It is, also, settled law that when a notice is sent through 'registered post' on correct address - it is presumed to have been delivered to the addressee under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
Delhi District Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Union Bank Of India vs Rhythm Cables And Others on 21 October, 2009

16) The law on the point is well-settled. Sending of summons by post to the registered office of the company, unless the contrary is shown, will be presumed to be service on the firm/company itself (Reliance placed on AIR 1980 SC 1163 ). It is also settled proposition of law that service of summons on an employee of the firm/company at the address of the company is good service {Reference may be made to AIR 1993 Calcutta 28;32- P. Sen ( Engg.) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Delite Builders ( P) Ltd.}. It is also settled law that when a notice is sent through 'registered post' on correct address- it is presumed to have been delivered to the addressee under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
Delhi District Court Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1