Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a notice terminating tenancy sent by registered post to the correct address, and returned with an endorsement indicating that the addressee was away and had not been available, amounts to sufficient service for the purpose of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
Analysis: Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 raises a statutory presumption of service when a document is properly addressed, prepaid and posted by registered post, and Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 permits the Court to presume the ordinary course of business. The notice in the present case was sent to the correct address, and the postal endorsement did not show any defect in address but only that the recipient was away and his return time was uncertain. In light of the governing presumption and the later consistent line of authority, the burden to rebut service was not discharged.
Conclusion: The notice was validly served and was sufficient to support the eviction suit; the challenge to service failed.
Final Conclusion: The revision was found to be without merit, and the decree under challenge was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: When a notice required by law is duly addressed, prepaid and sent by registered post to the correct address, service is presumed under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, read with Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, unless the addressee rebuts that presumption with credible evidence.