postal endorsement in exhibit P-5 would disclose that the postman had gone to the residence of the respondent on five occasions ... deliberate evasion by the accused when the same was tendered by the postman. . . . The general burden to prove the prosecution case since rests with
notice dated 23-11-1993 by registered post to the petitioner. The postman visited the house of the petitioner at Waghala ... found absent at her residence. On 1st December, 1993 when the postman visited the house of the petitioner, she refused to accept the notice
sent to his known residential
address through post registered with AD. The postman
entrusted with the service of the notice visited the house ... petitioner refused to receive the registered letter and told
the postman that the addressee was out of station. The
envelope containing the notice was returned
Thalassery Division,
Thalassery-670102.
3. Postmaster,
Ummencheria Postoffice,
Ummencheria.
4. MP.Hareendran, Postman,
Ummencheria.
(By R.P.Sandeep, Authorise representative)
Vs.
Rekha Sathyan, : RESPONDENT ... registered letter to the addressee A Latheef. The 4th opposite party/Postman and the other opposite parties were fully aware of the fact that
accused, it was for the complainant to have proved, by examining the postman, that the postal article was in fact received by the accused ... service on, and receipt by, the addressee. The difficulty is where the postman calls at the address mentioned and is unable to contact the addressee
aspects,
admittedly, there is correct description/residential address
of the accused. The postman returned the RPAD envelope
with an endorsement 'the addressee ... service on, and receipt by, the addressee. The difficulty is
where the postman calls at the address mentioned and is
unable to contact the addressee
address. Thereafter another endorsement is made, it is dated 11.9.2000, by the postman "Refused. Returned to sender" and the seal of the post ... that the notice was sent to the applicant on 26.8.2000, when the postman went to the address of the applicant
22nd August,
1997 but it was returned back with the postman's remark "left the
address". Then the case was instituted ... returned unserved on 24th September, 1998 with the
remark of the postman "not claimed". Then the case was
instituted. The same learned Chief
postal cover.
3. Exhibit P5, the returned postal cover shows that
the postman served an intimation on 15.4.2004 so as to
enable the addressee ... sender of the notice. Most often the
endorsement made by the postman may not be so legible so
as to enable the sender to decipher
receive the said tapal when it was tendered to him by the postman. According to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner ... office address of the petitioner and the endorsement of the postman to the effect that it was not claimed, would show that intimation regarding receipt
