{"id":200554,"date":"2018-08-24T09:41:23","date_gmt":"2018-08-24T04:11:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=200554"},"modified":"2018-08-28T12:45:28","modified_gmt":"2018-08-28T07:15:28","slug":"endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/","title":{"rendered":"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: <\/strong>A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed by the appellant-wife challenging an ex-parte order passed by a District Judge under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.<\/p>\n

Vide the order impugned, custody of the minor girl aged 7 years was ordered to be handed over to the respondent-husband. The grievance of the appellant was that there was no proper service of summons on her and still the trial Judge proceeded ex-parte. As per the record of the trial court, summons were issued against the appellant in the present matter relating to the custody of the minor child. The bailiff visited her house. The appellant was out of station, the summons returned unserved. Trial Judge observed that summons were sent to the appellant but it returned with an endorsement as unserved. Therefore, he proceeded ex-parte against the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant filed the instant appeal.<\/p>\n

The High Court reiterated that the rule of fair trial is that nobody should be condemned unheard. It was observed that the present was not a case of proper service and the trial judge had no discretion to proceed ex-parte only on the basis of a\u00a0 finding that notice was returned unserved.The envelope that was returned nowhere showed that the summons were refused by the appellant. The Court also referred to Order V CPC which deals with issue and service of summons. The Court was of the view that this was a child custody matter and the trial Judge was expected to be sensitive to the rights of the parties. The Court further observed, even it is assumed that the envelope returned with an endorsement as not claimed<\/em>, still it does not mean that it is an endorsement of refusal to accept the service.<\/em> Furthermore, even if there would have been a refusal to accept the service as per Order V Rule 17 CPC, service by affixing the copy of summons + plaint on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the house. It was held that as there was no service of summons, the ex-parte order is not tenable and deserved to be set aside. [Jayshri Gajendra Mahajan v. Gajendra Pandit Mahajan,2018 SCC OnLine Bom 2233<\/b><\/a>, dated 07-08-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed by the appellant-wife challenging an ex-parte <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[31572,31574,14101,31573,27494],"class_list":["post-200554","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-endorsement","tag-ex-parte-order","tag-fair-trial","tag-section-25-of-the-guardians-and-wards-act-1890","tag-summons"],"yoast_head":"\nEndorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed by the appellant-wife challenging an ex-parte\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-08-24T04:11:23+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-28T07:15:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/\",\"name\":\"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-08-24T04:11:23+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-28T07:15:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC","og_description":"Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.M. Dhavale, J. allowed an appeal filed by the appellant-wife challenging an ex-parte","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-08-24T04:11:23+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-28T07:15:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/","name":"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2018-08-24T04:11:23+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-28T07:15:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/24\/endorsement-of-not-claimed-cannot-be-read-as-refusal-to-accept-the-service-of-summons-under-order-v-cpc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Endorsement of \u2018not claimed\u2019 cannot be read as \u2018refusal to accept\u2019 the service of summons under Order V CPC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":201975,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/19\/court-where-minor-ordinarily-resides-has-jurisdiction-under-section-91-of-guardians-and-wards-act-1890\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":0},"title":"Court, where minor ordinarily resides, has jurisdiction under Section 9(1) of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 19, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: The question before a 2-Judge Bench comprising of C.K. Abdul Rehim and R. Narayana Pisharadi, JJ., was to determine the jurisdiction of Court, whether Court can entertain a matter related to guardianship of a minor or not where the expression \u201cthe place where the minor ordinarily resides\u201d\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":6687,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/07\/07\/unwed-mothers-are-not-required-to-give-notice-under-section-11-of-guardians-and-wards-act-1890-to-the-child-s-putative-father\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":1},"title":"Unwed mothers are not required to give notice under Section 11 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 to the child\u2019s putative father","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 7, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Delivering a quintessential decision interpreting Section 11 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, involving the question that whether an unwed mother must specify the name of the putative father in her petition for her appointment as the guardian of her child, the Division Bench of Vikramjit Sen and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Supreme Court"","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291055,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/01\/no-distinction-in-contested-and-ex-parte-divorce-decree-under-hma-section-15-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":2},"title":"Section 15 of HMA does not make any distinction between a contested decree and an ex parte decree; Delhi High Court upholds second marriage of husband","author":"Arunima","date":"May 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court observed that an ex parte decree of divorce also it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again if no appeal is filed against such decree within the period of limitation.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":219178,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/06\/del-hc-wifes-application-seeking-setting-aside-of-ex-parte-decree-of-judicial-separation-dismissed-on-treating-refusal-to-receive-summons-as-due-service\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":3},"title":"Del HC | Wife’s application seeking setting aside of ex-parte decree of Judicial Separation dismissed on treating refusal to receive summons as due service","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 6, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0A Division Bench of Hima Kohli and Asha Menon, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed by the appellant-wife against the order of the Family Court whereby her application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 CPC for setting aside of the ex-parte decree of judicial Separation passed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":201017,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/31\/custody-case-under-guardians-and-wards-act-transferred-as-child-not-expected-to-travel-100-kms-for-every-hearing\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":4},"title":"Custody case under Guardians and Wards Act transferred as child not expected to travel 100 km for every hearing","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 31, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Sahidullah Munshi, J. allowed an application under Section 24 CPC for transfer of a child custody case arising out of Section 7, 8 and 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The application was filed by the mother of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":363225,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/10\/rajasthan-hc-unclaimed-notice-not-valid-service-ex-parte-divorce-set-aside\/","url_meta":{"origin":200554,"position":5},"title":"Rajasthan HC holds notice returned ‘unclaimed’ not valid service; Sets aside ex-parte divorce decree","author":"Editor","date":"October 10, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA refusal for the purpose of service of notice should be taken to be a sufficient service, if such refusal is by the addressee or by the noticee himself\/herself.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Unclaimed Notice Not Valid Service","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Unclaimed-Notice-Not-Valid-Service.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Unclaimed-Notice-Not-Valid-Service.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Unclaimed-Notice-Not-Valid-Service.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Unclaimed-Notice-Not-Valid-Service.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200554","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=200554"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200554\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=200554"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=200554"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=200554"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}