Sec 2(2) : Decree

The decree is a formal expression of adjudication by which the court

determines the rights of parties regarding the matter in controversy or
dispute.

Essentials elements of a Decree:

1. There must be an adjudication.
2. The adjudication should be done in a suit.
3. It must determine the rights of parties regarding the matter in
dispute.
4. The determination of the right should be of conclusive nature.
5. There must be a formal expression of such adjudication.

Adjudication
The matter in dispute should be judicially determined

Madan Naik v. Hansubala Devi, if the matter is not judicially

determined then, it is not a decree.

Suit
For any decision to be considered as a decree, the adjudication must have
been done in suit. The term “suit” for this context can be understood
as “any civil procedure which has been instituted by the presentation
of a plaint”. The decree can only be in a civil suit. If there is no civil suit,
there can be no decree.

Rights in controversy
The rights of parties which are in controversy must be determined by a
formal adjudication. The rights determined under this circumstance are
substantial rights and not procedural rights.
Conclusive determination
The determination of rights in controversy in an adjudication should be
conclusive in nature. As held in the case of Narayan Chandra v. Pratirodh
Sahini, the determination should be final and conclusive regarding
the court which passes it.

Formal Expression
The adjudication should be expressed formally and such formal expression
should be given in the manner prescribed by law.

Decisions considered as a decree

The decisions held to be decree are as follows:

 Order of abetment of suit

 Dismissal of appeal as time-barred;
 Dismissal of suit or appeal due to the requirement of evidence or
proof;
 Rejection of plant due to non-payment of court fees;
 Order granting costs and instalments;

Decisions not considered as a decree

The decisions which are not considered as a decree are as follows:

 Dismissal of appeal for default;

 Appointment of Commissioner in order to take accounts;
 Order for remand;
 Order granting interim relief;
 An order refusing the grant of interim relief;
 Rejection of plaint in order to present it to the proper court;
 Application rejected for condonation of delay;
Types of Decree
The Code of Civil Procedure recognises the following three types of decrees.

1. Preliminary Decree
2. Final decree
3. A partly preliminary and partly final decree

Preliminary Decree

A decree is stated as a preliminary decree when the rights of parties

regarding all or any of the matter in dispute are determined in the

adjudication but it does not dispose of the suit completely. The preliminary

decree is only a prior stage

The Supreme Court in the case of Shankar v. Chandrakant held that the
preliminary decree is a decree in which the rights and liabilities of parties are
declared but the actual result is left to be decided in further proceedings.

Final Decree
The final decree is a decree which disposes of a suit completely and settles
all the matter in dispute between the parties. The final decree does not leave
any matter to be decided further.

It is considered as a final decree in the following ways.

1. When no appeal is filed against the decree within a prescribed time

period.
2. Matter in the decree has been decided by the highest court.
3. When the decree passed by the court disposes of the suit
completely.
Partly preliminary and partly final decree
A decree passed under the Code of Civil Procedure may be partly preliminary
and partly final. This happens some part of the decree is preliminary decree
while the rest is a final decree.

Illustrations
If there is a suit of possession of an immovable property along with the issue
of mesne profit, and the court is obliged.

1. Passes a decree deciding the possession of the property.

2. Directs for an enquiry of mesne profit.
The first part deciding the possession of the property is final while the part
regarding the mesne profit is preliminary.

Can there be more than one preliminary decree?

There is a conflict of opinion regarding this question that whether there can
be more than one preliminary decree in the same suit or not. Some High
Courts are of the view that there can be more

The Supreme Court in the case of Phoolchand v. Gopal Lal, held that
nothing in the Code of Civil Procedure prohibits passing of more than one
preliminary decree if the circumstance requires or if required by the Court.

Can there will more than one final decree:

Ordinarily, in one suit there is one preliminary and one final decree. In the
case of Gulusam Bivi v. Ahamadasa Rowther, the Madras High Court in
the light of Order 20 Rule 12 and 18 stated that the code nowhere
contemplates more than one preliminary or final decree.

In the case of Shankar v. Chandrakant, the Supreme Court finally settled

the conflict of opinion and stated that more than one final decree can be
passed.
Meaning of jurisdiction:
In general meaning, Jurisdiction is the power of the Court to take the
cognizance of an offence and to determine the cause of action.

According to Black’s Law dictionary Jurisdiction means “A court’s power to

decide on a case or issue a decree.”

The jurisdiction was defined in the case of Hirday Nath vs Ram Chandra. The
High Court of Calcutta stated that jurisdiction may be defined as judicial
power of Court to hear and determine the cause and adjudicate upon it

Jurisdiction is decided mainly on the basis of:-

 Pecuniary value
 Local limits of Court
 The subject matter of Court

Lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of

jurisdiction
Whenever the suit is made before the court the initial issue is to decide
whether the court has jurisdiction to deal with the matter. If the court has all
the three territorial, pecuniary or subject matter jurisdiction then simply the
court has the power to deal with any of the cases. If the court does not have
any of the jurisdiction then it will be recognised as lack of jurisdiction and
irregular exercise of jurisdiction. When the court does not have jurisdiction to
decide the case then such decision will be regarded as void or voidable
depending upon the circumstances.

Jurisdiction of foreign courts

A foreign court is described as a court outside India and not authorised or
continued by the authority of the Central Government, and a foreign
judgement means a judgement of a foreign court.

Kinds of jurisdiction
Territorial or local jurisdiction
Under this territorial or local jurisdiction, the geographical limits of a court’s
authority are clearly delineated and specified. It cannot exercise authority
beyond that geographical/ territorial limit. For example, if a certain crime is
committed in Madhya Pradesh, only the courts of law within the borders of
Madhya Pradesh can hear and decide the case.

Pecuniary jurisdiction
Pecuniary means ‘related to capital.’ It approaches the question of whether
the court is competent to try the case of the financial value. The code allows
analysing the case unless the suit’s value exceeds the financial limit of the
court.

For example, ’A ’wants to accuse ‘B’ due to a violation of the contract to

obtain Rs 5000 in Bombay. The Bombay High Court has original jurisdiction
and small causes court with the jurisdiction up to Rs 50000. So, a suit to
obtain Rs 5000 should ideally be dealt with small causes court.

Jurisdiction as to the subject matter

The subject matter can be defined as the authority vested in a court to
understand and try cases concerning a special type of subject matter. In
other words, it means that some courts are banned from hearing cases of a
certain nature. No question of choices can be decided by the court which do
not have subject matter jurisdiction

Original and appellate jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction refers to the court’s authority to review or rehearsal the
cases that have been already decided in the lower courts. In the Indian
circumstances, both the High Court and Supreme Court have the appellate
jurisdiction to take the subjects that are bought in the form of appeals.

Original Jurisdiction refers to the court’s authority to take notice of cases that
could be decided in these courts in the first instance itself. Unlike appellate
jurisdiction wherein courts review the previously decided matter, here the
cases are heard afresh.
Exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction
In Civil Procedure, exclusive jurisdiction means where a single court has the
authority to decide a case to the rejection of all the courts. This jurisdiction is
decided on the basis of the subject matter dealt with by a specific court. For
example, the U.S District courts have particular jurisdiction on insolvency
topics.

Concurrent jurisdiction exists where two or more courts from different

systems simultaneously have jurisdiction over a particular case. In this
situation, parties will try to have their civil or criminal case heard in the court
that they perceive will be most favourable to them.

General and special jurisdiction

General jurisdiction means that general courts do not limit themselves to
hearing only one type of cases. This type of jurisdiction means that a court
has the power to hear all types of cases. So the court that has general
jurisdiction can hear criminal, civil, family court case and much more.

Specific jurisdiction is the ability of the court to hear a lawsuit in a state

other than the defendant’s home state if that defendant has minimum
contacts within the state where the suit will be tried.

Expounding and expanding jurisdiction

Expounding jurisdiction means to describe, clarify and explain jurisdiction.
Expanding jurisdiction means to develop, expand or prolong jurisdiction. It is
the duty of the court to clarify its jurisdiction and it is not proper for the
court to extend its jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction of civil court

Section 9 of CPC
Section 9 of the Code of Civil procedure deals with the jurisdiction of civil
courts in India. It declares that the court shall have jurisdiction to try all
lawsuits of civil nature accepting suits of which their cognizance is either
expressly or impliedly barred.
Conditions
A Civil court has jurisdiction to decide a suit if two requirements are fulfilled:

1. The suit must be of a civil nature.

2. The cognizance of such a suit should not have been expressly or
impliedly barred

i) The suit of civil nature

Meaning
‘Civil Suit’ has not been explained in any act. Any suit that is not criminal in
nature can be termed as a suit of a civil nature. Any suit that pertains to
determination and implementation of civil rights may be defined as a civil
suit. In the case of Kehar Singh Nihal Singh Vs Custodian General, the court
elaborated the concept of Civil proceeding. It was defined as a grant of
private rights to individuals or corporations of society.

Nature and scope

The expression ‘suit of civil nature’ will cover the private rights and
obligations of the citizens. The political and religious question is not covered
by a suit of a civil nature. A suit in which principal question is related to caste
or religion is not of a suit of a civil nature. But if the main question in a suit
of civil nature involves the decision relating to caste question or to religious
rites and ceremonies it does not terminate to be a suit of a civil nature. The
court has jurisdiction to decide those questions also, in order to decide the
important question which is of civil nature.

In the case of Shankar Narayanan Potti vs K. Sreedevi, the Supreme Court

held that the ‘Civil Court has primary jurisdiction in all types of civil matters
as per Section 9 of CPC unless the action is expressly or impliedly barred.”
This means that Legislature can defeat the jurisdiction of the civil court by
adding a provision or clause in any Act itself.
ii) Cognizance not barred
A claimant having a complaint of a civil nature has the power to begin a civil
suit unless its cognizance is barred, either expressly or impliedly.

Suits expressly barred

A suit is said to expressly barred when it is prohibited by the statute for the
time being in force. It is subject to the competent legislature to bar the
jurisdiction of civil courts with regard to a specific class of suits of civil
nature, provided that, in doing so it retains itself within the scope of
legislation given to it and does not contradict any terms of the constitution.

Suits impliedly barred

A suit is said to be impliedly barred when it is said to be excluded by general
principles of law. When a specific remedy is given by statute, it, therefore,
denies a person who requires a remedy of any different form than is given by
statute. When an act formed an obligation and made its performance in a
specified manner that performance cannot be implemented in any other
manner.

Exclusion of jurisdiction: Limitations

The common assumption is that the civil court has the jurisdiction to try the
case. The prosecution has a case of a civil nature has, independent of any
statute, a power to initiate a suit in a civil court unless its notice is expressly
or impliedly barred yet it cannot be said that the jurisdiction is entirely
eliminated. In the case of Secretary of State Vs Mask & Co , the Privy Council
rightly mentioned that it is established law that the exclusion of jurisdiction
of the civil court is not to be readily inferred but that such prohibition is
either impliedly barred or explicitly expressed.

Premier automobiles v. K.D Wadke

The Supreme Court laid down the following principles as relevant to the
jurisdiction of civil courts in association with industrial disputes:

1. If a conflict is not an industrial conflict, nor does it correlate to the

enforcement of any other right under the industrial dispute act, the
remedy lies only in civil court.
2. If a conflict is an industrial conflict emerging out of a right or liability
under the general or public law, the jurisdiction of the court is an
 alternative left to the person involved to decide his remedy for the
support which is sufficient to be given in a particular remedy.
3. If an industrial dispute relates to the implementation of the right or
a duty organised under the act, then the only remedy available is to
get adjudication under the act.

Dhulabhai v. state of MP
Hidyatullah summarized the following principles relating to exclusion of
jurisdiction of civil courts:

1. When a statute provides finality to the orders of particular tribunals,

the civil court jurisdiction must be kept to be prohibited. Such a
provision does not eliminate those cases where the terms of the act
have not complied with fundamental laws of judicial method.
2. When there is an express bar of jurisdiction of the court, an
examination of a scheme of a particular act to find the adequacy or
sufficiency of remedies provided may be important but this is not
crucial for maintaining the jurisdiction of a civil court

Meaning
Res means every object of right that forms the subject matter in a particular
case. In Latin, the term Sub-judice means ‘under a judge’ or in other words,
a matter ‘under consideration’. It means a cause that is under trial or
pending before a court or judge. The doctrine of res-judicata prevents the
trial of a suit which is already pending in a court of competent jurisdiction.
When the same parties file two or three cases in the same matter, the
competent court has the power to stay proceedings of another court. The
primary aim is to prohibit the courts of concurrent jurisdiction from
simultaneously entertaining two parallel litigations.

Nature, Scope and Objective

The principle of res sub-judice prevents the court from proceeding with the
trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is directly or substantially the
same with the previously instituted suit between the same parties and the
court where the issue is previously instituted is pending has the power to
grant the relief sought.
This rule is applicable to the trial of the suit and not the institution. It does
not restrict the court from passing interim orders like injunction or stay.
However, it applies to revisions and appeals.

The purpose behind this rule is to prevent multiplicity of cases in courts. It is

also sought to prevent the plaintiff from getting two separate decisions from
different courts in his favour or two contradictory judgements. It also
ensures to protect the litigant from unnecessary harassment. The policy of
law is to restrict the plaintiff to one legislation, thus obviating the possibility
of two conflicting verdicts by one and the same court in respect of the same
relief.

Conditions
Section 10 of the Civil Procedural Code, 1908 deals with the conditions
required to apply the principle of res sub judice. The conditions in the
process of application of res sub-judice are:

 Where the matter in issue is same

Section 10 clearly states that the matter in issue in both the suits must be
directly or substantially be the same.In other words there must be two suits
one that is previously instituted and another that is subsequently substituted.
The issues of both the suits should be same to get the benefit of this
principle, it is not sufficient if only one or two issues are common. In the
circumstances were the entire issues are not the same, the court may
exercise its power under Section 151 and stay the trial in a subsequent suit
or the trial of the suit may be consolidated. The power of courts to stay the
trial under Section 151 is discretionary in nature and can be exercised only
when there is an abuse of process of court and if it defeats the ends of
justice.

Matter directly and substantially in issue– Here “directly” means

immediately i.e. without any intervention. The word “substantially” implies
essentially or materially.

Matter collaterally and incidentally in issue– It is just contrary to the

matter directly or substantially in issue.

 Where the parties in suits are same

The two suits should have the same parties or their representatives.

 Where the title of the suit is same

The title of both the suits for which the parties are litigating should also be
same.

 Where the suit must be pending

The former suit must be pending in the court while the latter suit is
instituted. The word pending is for the previously instituted suit, where the
final decision has not been arrived at.

 In a competent court
In Neeta vs. Shiv Dayal Kapoor & Others it was held the subsequent matter
can not be stayed if the conditions mentioned in Section 10 are not fulfilled.
In the apparent case, the two courts which tried the same issues were not
the courts having concurrent jurisdiction. Therefore, the proceedings in the
subsequent court were not staye

Suit pending in foreign court

The explanation clause of Section 10 clearly provides that there is no
limitation on the power of an Indian court to try a subsequent instituted suit
if the previously instituted suit is pending in a foreign suit. This also means
that the cases can be carried on simultaneously in two courts.

Consolidation of suits
The objective behind Section 10 is to avoid two contradictory decisions in the
same matter by different courts. To overcome this the courts can pass an
order of consolidation of both the suits.

Effect of contravention
Any decree passed in contravention of Section 10 is not null and therefore
cannot be disregarded completely. It is to be clearly understood here that it
is only the trial and not the institution of the subsequent suit which is barred
under this section. But this right which is given in favour of parties can be
waived by them. Hence, if the parties in a suit decides to waive their rights
and ask the court to proceed with the subsequent suit, they cannot
afterwards challenge the validity of the subsequent proceeding
Plaint :

It can be said to be a statement of claim, a document by

presentation of which the suit is instituted.

Order 7 rule 1 : particulars of plain :

(a) The name of the Court in which the suit is brought.

(b) The name, description and place of residence of the plaintiff.
(c) The name, description and place of residence of the defendant, so far as they can be
ascertained.
(d) Where the plaintiff or the defendant is a minor or a person of unsound mind, a statement
to that effect.
(e) The facts constituting the cause of action and when it arose.
(f) The facts showing that the Court has jurisdiction.
(g) The relief which the plaintiff claims.
(h) Where the plaintiff has allowed a set-off or relinquished a portion of his claim, the
amount so allowed, or relinquished.
(i) A statement of the value of the subject matter of the suit for the purposes of jurisdiction
and of court fees, so far as the case admits.

11. Rejection of plaint.

The plaint shall be rejected in the following cases-
(a) where it does not disclose a cause of action;
(b) where the relief claimed is undervalued, and the plaintiff, on being
required by the Court to correct the valuation within a time to be fixed
by the Court, fails to do so;
(c) where the relief claimed is properly valued, but the plaint is returned
upon paper insufficiently stamped, and the plaintiff, on being required
by the Court to supply the requisite stamp-paper within a time to be
fixed by the Court, fails to do so;
(d) where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be
barred by any law:

E where it is not filed in duplicate

F plantiff fails to comply with the provisoin of rule 9

In S.M.P. Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd. v. World Tanker Carrier

Corporation, the plaint was rejected on the same grounds that there was no
cause of action mentioned in the plaint submitted by the plaintiff.

Kuldeep singh vs ganpat Lal :

It was held that cause of action is necessary because It consists of all the
necessary facts.

Rule 10 order 7 return of plaint :


o Rule 10 deals with the return of plaint. It states that -
(1) Subject to the provisions of rule 10A, the plaint shall at any stage of the suit be
returned to be presented to the Court in which the suit should have been instituted.
Explanation. — For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that a Court of appeal or
revision may direct after setting aside the decree passed in a suit, the return of the plaint
under this sub-rule.
(2) Procedure on returning plaint —On returning a plaint, the Judge shall endorse thereon
the date of its presentation and return, the name of the party presenting it, and a brief
statement of the reasons for returning it.

10A. Power of Court to fix a date

of appearance in the Court
where plaint is to be filed after
its return.
(1) Where, in any suit, after the defendant has appeared, the Court is of
opinion that the plaint should be returned, it shall, before doing, so,
intimate its decision to the plaintiff.

(2) Where an intimation is given to the plaintiff under sub-rule (1), the
plaintiff may make an application to the Court-
(a) specifying the Court in which he proposes to present the plaint after
its return,
(b) praying that the Court may fix a date for the appearance of the
parties in the said Court, and
(c) requesting that the notice of the date so fixed may be given to him
and to the defendant.

(3) Where an application is made by the plaintiff under sub-rule (2), the
Court shall, before returning the plaint and notwithstanding that the
order for return of plaint was made by it on the ground that it has no
jurisdiction to try the suit,-
(a) fix a date for the appearance of the parties in the Court in which the
plaint is proposed to be presented, and
(b) give to the plaintiff and to the defendant notice of such date for
appearance.
(4) Where the notice of the date for appearance is given under sub-rule
(3),-
(a) it shall not be necessary for the Court in which the plaint is
presented after its return, to serve the defendant with a summons for
appearance in the suit, unless that Court, for reasons to be recorded
otherwise directs, and
(b) the said notice shall be deemed to be a summons for the
appearance of the defendant in the Court in which the plaint is
presented on the date so fixed by the Court by which the plaint was
returned.

(5) Where the application made by the plaintiff under sub-rule (2) is
allowed by the Court, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to appeal against
the order returning the plaint.

Rule 10B – Transfer of suit

This rule empowers the court to transfer suit to the proper court.
When the plaintiff files an appeal against the order of return, the
court may direct the plaintiff to file a complaint with the court, which
has jurisdiction to try that suit and may also fix an appearance date
for the same.

Manipal University vs. Manipal Academy Of Health

The Apex Court says the court is invalidated because the trial court failed to
follow the instructions of subrule 2 of Rule 10A of Order 7 of CPC, which
amounts to procedural irregularities.
 In the case of Ramesh Chand v. Anil Panjwani, the Supreme Court outlined
the three modes of pleading or presenting a counter-claim in a civil suit:

 In the written statement filed under Order 8 Rule 1;

 By amending the written statement with the court’s permission to
include a counter-claim; and
 In a subsequent pleading under Order 8 Rule 9.

The Supreme Court in Union of India v. Karan Chand Thapar and Bros. (Coal
Sales) Ltd. and Ors., held that Black’s Law Dictionary defines the concept of
set-off as the right of a debtor to reduce his part of the debt by the amount
which the creditor owes to him.

Set-off Counter Claim

Provision for counter

Provision for set-off has been given under Rule 6(1) of claim has been given
Order 8. under Rule 6(A) of Order
8.

Here both parties are reciprocally debtors and creditors to

It is like a cross-action,
each other i.e. even if plaintiff has instituted the suit for
which is filed separately
recovery of money, the defendant also has right to set-off
in the same proceeding.
the amount which is payable to him by plaintiff.

It does not act as a

defence, rather it is a
It acts as a defence to the action of the plaintiff.
cross- action i.e., a
distinct suit.

It is not necessary for a

Set-off can be filed from the same transaction and that counter claim to emerge
amount should be ascertainable. from the same
transaction.

It acts as a separate
It should be pleaded in a written statement. action which is as
effective as a plaint.

Counter Claim is not

Set-offs are of 2 types- Legal and Equitable set-off.
divided into any types.
  The suit should be for the recovery of money
 The amount shall be legally recoverable
 Amount receivable should be ascertained
 Pecuniary limits of the jurisdiction of the court should not be
exceeded
 Same character should be filled by both the parties

Summons :

The word ‘summon’ has not been defined anywhere in the code. The
definition of summons as given by the Oxford dictionary states that, “a
document which is issued from the court of justice and calls upon a person to
whom it is directed, to be present before a judge or court for a specific
reason is called a summon.”

Objective of summons
The following are the objectives of summons:

 It is important to inform a person about any legal action that has

been taken against them.
 It gives an opportunity to the defendant to present his case and side
of the story.
 The basis of summons lies in the maxim “Audi Alteram
Partem”, which means to hear both sides.
 It further helps in following the principles of natural justice and
ensures fair proceedings and trial.
 To produce the necessary documents.

Essentials of summons
The essentials of a summon are given under Order 5, Rules 1 and 2 of the
code. These are:

 Every summon must be signed by the judge or any other officer

whom he appoints to do so on his behalf.
  It must be sealed properly.
 The court will not issue any summons to the defendant if he has
appeared before the court at the time of the institution of the
plaint.
 After summons are issued, the defendant is required to file written
statements within 30 days. If he fails to do so, he has to provide
reasons, and if the court is satisfied, it can extend the time period to
file written statements to not more than 90 days.
 Another essential element of summons is that every summon must be
accompanied by a copy of the plaint.

Contents of summons
Rule 5 to Rule 8 of Order 5 under the code gives the content of summons. A
summon must contain:

 Information, whether it is issued for settlement of issues or final

disposal of the suit. According to Rule 5, the court of small causes
can only issue a summons for the final disposal of a suit and nothing
else.
 It must contain the date and day fixed for the appearance of the
defendant, considering the factors like the residence of the
defendant, time, etc., so that he can get a reasonable time and
opportunity to appear before the court.
 It also contains the list of necessary documents that a defendant is
required to produce in court.
 If the summons is issued for final disposal, it must direct the
defendant to produce witnesses on his behalf to support his side.

Service by the court

Rule 9 of the Order deals with the service of summons by court. It provides
that if a defendant resides within the jurisdiction of the court, then the
summons must be served to him by the court officer. It can also be served
by post, fax, message, email service, approved courier service, etc., but if
the defendant does not live within the jurisdiction, then it must be served by
the officer of the court within whose jurisdiction he resides.

The Supreme Court, in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union
of India (2005), directed the high courts to make appropriate rules or
guidelines to ensure that the provisions of summons are implemented
properly without any abuse of power or process of law.

Service by plaintiff
According to Rule 9A of the Order, the court may permit the plaintiff, on his
application, to serve summons to the defendants. He has to deliver the copy
of the summons which is sealed and signed by the judge or any other officer
appointed by the judge to do so, and also make sure that the defendant
summons acknowledges the service. If the defendant refuses to acknowledge
the service or if it cannot be served personally, the court will re-issue the
summons and serve it to the defendant.

Personal or direct service

This mode of service of summons is simple. In this mode, a copy of the
summons is issued to the concerned person or his agent or any other person
on his behalf, and the person receiving the summons must acknowledge the
same. It is the duty of the officer serving summons to ensure and make an
endorsement with regard to the summons served that states the time and
manner of service, the name and address of the person receiving the
summons, and witness to the delivery of the summons.

Substituted service
Substituted service means a mode of service of summons that is adopted in
place of ordinary service of summons. There are two modes of substituted
service as given under Rules 17, 19 and 20 of the Order. These are:

 If the defendant or his agent refuses to acknowledge or sign the

receipt of the summons, or if the officer serving the summons
reasonably believes that the defendant is not present at his
residence and will not be found within a reasonable time, and
moreover if there is no agent to receive summons on his behalf, he
may affix the copy of the summons on the door or any conspicuous
part of his house.
o In this case, the serving officer has to make a report
stating the reasons for affixing the summons, the
circumstances, the name and address of the person who
helped him and the witnesses to affixing the summons.
o The court can declare that the summons has been issued if
it is satisfied with the report of the officer.
  If the defendant is deliberately avoiding service and the court has a
reason to believe so, it may affix the summons in some conspicuous
place in the court and house of the defendant where he used to
reside, carry on business or work for somebody.
 if a court orders to advertise the summons in the newspaper, then
it must be done in a local newspaper where the defendant lived, had
a business, or worked.
According to Rule 20, if a court orders to advertise the summons in the
newspaper, then it must be done in a local newspaper where the defendant
lived, had a business, or worked. This service is an effective option to serve
summons even if the defendant is not reading the newspaper (Sunil Poddar
v. Union Bank of India, 2008).