Khiroda Sundari Dasi And Anr. vs Nabin Chandra Saha on 8 April, 1915
An abstract from the register has been proved and it does not show that Mazharul Haq had authority to accept service of summons. He must, therefore, in this matter be regarded merely as a male member of the family of the defendant. As to the first objection, that it is not shown that the petitioner could not be found, it is sufficient to say that the petitioner is a parda na hin lady and, therefore, not directly approachable. It was held in Khiroda Sundari Das v. Nabin Chandra Saha 30 Ind. Cas. 64 : 21 C.L.J. 653 : 19 C.W.N. N. 1231 that where a par da nashin lady is no table to accept service personally and has no agent empowered to accept service on her behalf and ha also no adult member in he family on whom service may be effected, on such a case a valid service is effected under he provisions of Rule 17 if the serving officer affixes a copy of the summons on an outer door or some other conspicuous part of the house in which the lady ordinarily resides. The question is thus reduced to the second objection, as to whether in fact the petitioner was ordinarily raiding at Kazipur or not.