TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (1) TMI 614
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ef to set aside the decree for a sum of Rs. 13,640 with future interest passed in C. A. No. 1494 of 1993 in C. P. No. 88 of 1989 dated June 14, 1997. The learned single judge has passed an order in C A. No. 510 of 1999 dated July 16, 2001, dismissing the said application. The learned single judge has come to the conclusion that, the official liquidator has also filed an affidavit of proof of service where, there is an acknowledgment card which shows that notice has been served. The learned judge who heard the matter has recorded a finding that, "the sole respondent has been served. In view of the factual finding recorded on June 14, 1997, that the sole respondent has been served, I am unable to accept the submission made by learned counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed on June 14, 1997, as prayed for by the official liquidator. The main stand of the respondent/official liquidator is that the appellant/applicant was given sufficient time to cause their appearance before this court but, she did not cause her appearance on the date of hearing. We have heard learned counsel and noticed the rival contentions of the parties. It is an accepted principle that when an individual denies service by registered post on oath, then the burden shifts on the other side to prove service. It cannot be gain said that whether service of notice amounts to valid service or not must be considered by an appropriate authority before recording a finding that it was served. As a matter of fact, the word "claim" in clause (b) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o "Visalakshi, Bharathi Nagar, Thirumangalam-626706" and that we are of the view that the signature of the addressee found in the acknowledgement card is different from that of the appellant/applicant and as such we come to the inevitable conclusion that the said registered notice was not received by the appellant/applicant. Furthermore, the address of the appellant/applicant in C.A. No. 1494 of 1993 in C.P. No. 88 of 1989 is furnished as "Visalakshi, as d/o Dr. B.V. Subramanian, 14A, Bharathi Street, Thirumangalam". It is significant to make a mention that in the acknowledgment card, the door No. 14-A is not mentioned and the name of the street is also not mentioned as "Bharathi Street" instead it is mentioned as "Bharathi Nagar". In C.A. ....