The Bombay High Court has recently suggested that the courts can use platforms like courier, email, Whatsapp, etc. as the “ modern ways of service” while ordering summons by way of substituted service.
The Court has stated that the interpretation of the rules mentioned in the Civil Procedure Code provides an option to the courts to serve the order to appear before a Judge or Magistrate (summons) in a manner as the Court may deem fit. The manner of service opted by the Court should be equivalent to the modes of service already stated in the rules and in the present scenario, the Courts can take into account service by modern ways which are available through the internet.
The Bombay HC has made this order in an appeal filed against an order of the District Court for setting aside the order made in the absence of the defendant. The HC has stated that the defendant could not be served with summons as the address was incorrect. The Court has upheld the District Judge's order while opining that the defendant must have informed the Court of the change in address.
Further, the Court has stated that the defendant never really had the “ actual real knowledge” of the proceedings even though the plaintiff complied with the procedure. It is the duty of the Court to take a “ just and reasonable view not limiting itself to the procedural formalities” . Thus, compliance with the proceedings as a mere formality cannot be a correct approach to apply the principle of service.
653+ Lawyers are online 
.jpg)
.jpg)
