service of notice - The Legal Chamber

Key Ruling on Vakalatnama & “No Instructions”: Supreme Court Clarifies Lawyer-Client Procedure in Civil Cases

4Feb

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Key Ruling on Vakalatnama & “No Instructions”: Supreme Court Clarifies Lawyer-Client Procedure in Civil Cases

The Supreme Court clarified that a counsel’s “no instruction” pursis does not equate to withdrawal of vakalatnama under the Advocates Act or Civil Manual. Absent a formal withdrawal, the court is not obligated to issue fresh notice; a litigant’s failure to instruct counsel cannot invalidate proceedings. The High Court’s interference under Article 227 was deemed unwarranted. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Shri Digant, filed a civil suit in 2014 against the respondents, M/s. P.D.T. Trading Co. & Ors., for possession under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The defendants were initially served summons, and after they failed to appear, the suit proceeded ex parte. Upon applications, these ex parte orders were later recalled, and the defendants filed written statements. Duri...

Supreme Court Verdict : Police Can’t Serve Appearance Notices via WhatsApp

The Supreme Court dismissed the application seeking modification of its earlier order, holding that electronic communication (e.g., WhatsApp) is not a valid mode for serving notices under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. The Court emphasized that such notices, which impact personal liberty, must adhere strictly to prescribed modes of service under the BNSS. It clarified that while electronic service is permissible for court summons under Sections 63, 64, and 71 of the BNSS, the same cannot be extended to investigative notices under Section 35, as the legislative intent excludes electronic modes for this purpose. The judgment underscores the importance of safeguarding individual liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Facts Of The Case: The case aro...

Supreme Court Restores Ejectment Decree: ‘ND’ Postal Endorsement Doesn’t Invalidate Notice Under Transfer of Property Act

The Supreme Court held that a notice sent via registered post under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is deemed served under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1887, even if returned with an "ND" (Not Delivered) endorsement. The High Court erred in setting aside the ejectment decree by ignoring this legal presumption of service. The Trial Court's decree was restored, affirming the landlord's right to evict the tenant for non-payment of rent and other charges. The judgment reinforces the principle that proper dispatch of a registered notice fulfills statutory service requirements unless rebutted. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Krishna Swaroop Agarwal (since deceased and represented by his legal heir), was the landlord of a property in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh, which ...