been rejected and the learned court below has refused to accord its permission as required under Section 9 of the Act, 1956 to give petitioner ... however, unserved envelope has been received with remark of the postman, "refused to receive".
Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an affidavit
delivery
to the Plaintiff and that she had refused it. The evidence of the
Postman, the witness of the Defendant in no way strengthens ... March 2013 as admitted by her. No
Postman of Gangtok was examined to establish such refusal nor
does the signature of the Plaintiff appear
when the
petitioner was shown to be served by the postman by
refusal i.e. on 25.06.2012, petitioner was out of
country. It was specifically
divorce suit. The present is
not a case where the Postman has endorsed refusal of
summons by the appellant, therefore, when notice was not
sent
person of the
name of defendant resides. Hence, the Postman returned the registered
notice to the Court below. Another specific finding is given that ... applicant on the ground that in the envelop, the Postman has made an
entry "refused to receive the notice." On careful perusal
petition issued to him having been returned with the postman's
note "refused to accept".
It is an admitted fact that
endorsement on the envelope that it
was refused, was not even proved by examining the
postman or any other material to show that
served upon her, is a
total falsity as she has refused the notice sent through RPAD,
has, in support of this contention in the statement ... evidence to show that the remarks
"refused" has been written by the Postman in Ex.P.20.
Ex.P.20 does not bear
that
she had refused the payment. Ishwar Prasad Gupta, examined as
D.W.4 alleged to be the Postman of the said area, admitted that ... indeed a Postman or that he had gone to the house of
the Appellant to deliver the money which she refused, this Court
cannot place
disputed here is that the postal endorsement was falsely made by the postman in collusion with the revisionist and her son. It is significant ... service at the address mentioned on the envelop. Thus refusal recorded by the postman was unquestionable.
The service by speed post for the reason recorded
