Substituted service under Order 5 Rule 20 CPC stands where prior failed personal service shows necessary judicial satisfaction.

Order 5 Rule 20 CPC permits substituted service only after the trial court is satisfied that the defendant is avoiding service or cannot be served in the ordinary way. An express recital of that satisfaction in the order sheet is not mandatory where the surrounding record shows repeated unsuccessful attempts at personal service; in such circumstances, the court may presume that the required satisfaction existed before substituted service was ordered. On that basis, the challenge to the substituted service order failed, and the ex parte decree was not set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order directing substituted service of summons was valid when the order sheet did not expressly record the trial court's satisfaction, and whether the ex parte decree could be set aside on that ground.

Analysis: Order 5 Rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure requires the trial court to be satisfied that the defendant is keeping out of the way or that summons cannot be served in the ordinary way before substituted service is ordered. The absence of an express recital in the order sheet of such satisfaction, or of the reasons for it, is not ative if the surrounding record shows repeated unsuccessful attempts at personal service. The court may presume that the necessary satisfaction existed before the order for substituted service was passed. Since the record disclosed sufficient prior attempts to serve the summons personally, the challenge to substituted service failed.

Conclusion: The substituted service order was upheld, and the application to set aside the ex parte decree was not maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record shows that personal service was attempted and failed, the validity of substituted service under Order 5 Rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure is not defeated merely because the order sheet does not expressly recite the trial court's satisfaction.

---