AIR 1980 SUPREME COURT 1163 ::(1980) LS 56 ::(1980) 3 MahLR 242 ::1980 UJ (SC) 606 ::1980 (3) SCC 595 ::(1981) 94 Mad LW 12 ::(1980) 2 SCJ 324

Supreme Court Of India

(From : AIR 1978 Madh Pra 157)

Hon'ble Judge(s): N. L. Untwalia, P. N. Shinghal, V. D. Tulzapurkar , JJJ

Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , O.29 R.2(b)— Suit against a company - Mode of service of summons - Leaving summons at its registered office - Meaning of Cl.(b) has to be understood with reference to O.5 R.17 - Mere handing over of summons to an employee not authorised to accept summons does not amount to valid service of summons on company. AIR 1979 Madh Pra 157, Reversed. The meaning of Clause (b) of O.29, R.2 has got to be understood in the background of the provision s of Order 5 which is meant for issue and service of summons on natural persons. Sending a summons by post to the registered office of the company, unless the contrary is shown, will be presumed to be cervice on the company itself. But the first part of clause (b) has got to be understood with reference to the other provisions of the code.(Para 7) The words "Ieaving the summons at the registered office" under Cl. (b) do not mean that the summons can be left anywhere uncared for in the registered office of the company. These words have to be read in the background of the provision contained in Order 5, Rule 17 of the Code. In other words. if the serving peon or bailiff is not able to serve the summons on the Secretary or any Director or any other Principal Officer of the Corporation because either he refuses to sign the summons or is not to be found by th....