FACULTY OF LAW

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

SUBJECT: HEALTH LAW

TOPIC : LEGAL REGULATION OF AYURVEDIC MEDICINE

Submitted to- Submitted by-

Dr. Subhradipta Sarkar Abhinav Pandey
Faculty of Law Semester-VIII
Jamia Millia Islamia(Self-Financed)
Roll no. 04

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am deeply indebted toDr Subhradipta Sarkar., Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi
for his initial and continuous encouragement and guidance, without which this work would have
been very difficult for me. If I have failed to come up to his expectation, both on facts and
interpretation, I alone am responsible.

I would be failing in my obligations if I do not convey my thanks to all the authors of the books
and articles from which I have quoted and made references.

I am very thankful to everyone who have had given me their direct and indirect support to
complete my work and give support to outcome from and difficulty while completing my work.

I wish to thank my parents and my brother for their moral support and constant inspiration. I am
also thankful to those who have not being mentioned by name but nevertheless having been of
invaluable help in their inscrutable ways. Lastly, I would like to thank the Almighty God,
without who’s blessing no one can accomplish anything.

-ABHINAV PANDEY

2|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.no Topic Page

no.

1. Introduction 4

2. Legal Regulations In India 5

3. Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 6

4. Drugs and Cosmetics Rule, 1945 8

5. Drugs & Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements Act,

9
1954 an d Rules

6. Indian Medicine Central Council (Minimum Standards Of

Education In Indian Medicine) Regulations, 1986.
10

7. Problems In Present system 12

8. Problems In Present system and judicial response 13

9. Conclusion 15

10. Bibliography 16

INTRODUCTION
3|Page
 A summons is a legal document that is issued by a Court on a person involved in a legal
proceeding. When a legal action is taken against a person or when any person is required to
appear in the court as a witness in a court proceedings, to call upon such person and ensure his
presence on the given date of the proceedings, summons is served. If the summons is not duly
served then no action can be taken against the defendant. If defendant fails to attend court after
receiving summons, he will be ex-parte by the Court. Section 27 and Order V of the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (In short ‘CPC’) deal with ‘Service of Summons’ on the
defendant/Respondent. Order 16 deals with summoning and attendance of witnesses. Sections 61
to 69 of Cr.P.C deals with service of summons on accused and witness. This article is only
confined to service of summons in a Civil Proceedings. Order V of CPC contains Rules 1 to 30.
These provisions deal with issue and service of summons. Under the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908, there are different modes of effecting service of summons on defendant. It is needless to
say that non-service of summons and notices in a civil suit proceedings is a great hurdle for
speedy disposal of a civil suit. There are several reasons for non-service of summons to
defendant in time. Furnishing correct address of the defendant in the plaint would be helpful to
avoid delay in service of summons. Recently, the Courts have expanded the scope of service of
summons through information technology. We often across with the situations that in many civil
cases, defendant takes plea that summons was not duly served on him. Similarly, in general,
court often use the method of substitute of service of summons by way of paper publication.

Order V, Rule 19-A was inserted in Order 5 w.e.f. 1-2-1977 by Amendment Act No. 104 of
1976. In order to avoid delay in actual service, the service of summons, through registered
acknowledgement due post was inserted. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 19-A is analoguous to Section 27
of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The proof that a letter has been posted is usually evidence of
its delivery under section 16 of the Evidence Act.

In most of the cases, we come across the situations where the defendant argues that the
newspaper in which his name was published in widely circulated newspaper and therefore he
could not see it. We know the difficult to cause service of summons to defendant when he
resides in abroad. If a spouse gets divorce without valid service of notice in a divorce case, the
mental agony of the other spouse cannot be explained in terms and so also the agony of
defendant in a money suit, when the plaintiff obtains exparte decree without valid service of

notice. I, therefore, opine that it is very essential to know the procedure as to valid service of
summons/notice. There are many other situations we come across in regular course of time as to
4|Page
 effective service of summons in civil cases. I made a small attempt to furnish some valuable
rulings in this article on this topic of ‘service of summons’ and that I hope that this article may
be helpful to lawyers and judicial officers while dealing with service of summons in a civil suit. I
quoted several citations in this article on different facets of service of summons.

It is the fundamental principle from the latin maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit that act of
court shall prejudice no man unless sanctioned by law. But, it is well-settled law that even in ex
parte cases, Court has to pass a reasoned order by discussing the pleadings and evidence of the
party. In our Court proceedings, we regularly see exparte decrees. Before ordering substitute
service of summons or notice, the Court must satisfy the requirements as per law. If any decree
is obtained by fraud, such decree would be null and void. Though substituted service is a
sufficient service in ordinary circumstances, Courts shall be careful to see that conditions
enumerated in Order 5 Rule 20(1), CPC have been strictly complied with before ordering
substituted service. As to this point in our Hon’ble Division Bench in Maganti Krishna Durga
Vs. Maganti Anil Kumar – 2015 (5) ALT 346 (D.B.), it was observed that Where the husband
obtains a decree of divorce ex parte by practising fraud, husband cannot take advantage of
Section 15 of Hindu Marriage Act and remarry. Similarly, ex parte decree against defendant has
to be set aside, if he satisfies Court that summons had not been duly served or he was prevented
by sufficient cause from appearing before Court when suit was called on for hearing However,
Court shall not set aside said ex parte decree on mere irregularity in service of summons or in a
case where defendant had notice of date of hearing and sufficient time to appear in Court Not
permissible for Court to allow said application in utter disregard of terms and conditions
incorporated in second proviso to Rule 13 of Order IX CPC. Before setting aside an exparte
decree, it is important to note the limitation factor to set aside ex parte decree. A distinction be
maintained in regard to computation of period of limitation between cases where summons was
served on defendant and appearance entered in suit and set ex parte and cases where summons
was not served at all and defendant was not aware of the ex parte decree. This issue was
succinctly answered in K. Surekha Reddy v. V. Chandraiah – 2011 (2) ALT 468.

Address for Service:- In Andhra Pradesh, Rule 2 (a) of Civil Rules of Practice and Circular
Orders, 1990 defines ‘Address for Service’. Rule 7 of CRP deals with Service of notice. Under
11 [8 (2) & (New) of CRP, Every pleadings shall contain the address for Service. The address

5|Page
 for service shall contain particulars such as the Municipal or Panchayat number of the house,
name of the street and locality.

Procedure for service of Summons/notice: – It was provided in Rule 7 of CRP. Under this rule,
except where otherwise provided by the Code, or these Rules, or any law for the time being in
force, any notice, directed to be given to any party shall be in writing and may be served by the
party or his Advocate on the other party, or his Advocate personally, or be sending the same by
post in a registered post cover “ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DUE, OR BY SPEED POST OR BY
AN APPROVED COURIER SERVICE OR BY FAX MASSAGE OR BY ELECTRONIC
MALE SERVICE OR BY SUCH MEANS” to the address for service of the party or his
Advocate. Under Rule 7 (3), the District Judge shall prepare a panel of courier services for the
Courts situated at the District Head Quarters for sending summons, notices and other process by
such courier service. Under Order 7 and Order 6 CPC, it is the duty of the plaintiff to furnish in
the full cause title and separate and independent addresses which are known as registered
address for service of all the defendants.

Need of making rules and regulations for service of summons and notices through electronic
means:- In this computer era, usage of mobiles and computers has been increasing day by day.
So many Apps are being introduced day by day and social media is now become more powerful
tool even for common people. Within fraction of seconds, messages are being communicated
among the people because of recent computer technology. Sending messages by E-mail,
Whatsapp, Telegram, Slack etc., became easy task to all age groups. The concept of E-courts has
been praying vital role in judiciary and is making efforts for computerization of all courts in
India. Now, the Hon’ble Supreme Court expanded the scope of electronic media in judiciary.
But, information technology and notices is not being properly used by all the courts in service of
summons because the court system does not have the facility to effect the service through
electronic mode. Provisions under Part X of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) and
Order V, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 enables the High Court to make rule and
regulations in this regard. The Delhi High Court has also made rules regarding the service of
legal notices through email by the virtue of above legal provisions and other provisions which
enables it in this regard.

6|Page
 Summons/Notices through E-mail:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Central Electricity
Regulatory Commission Vs. National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd., (2010) 10 SCC
280], permitted the service of Notice by email along with the ordinary mode of serving notice. In
Ksl and Industries Ltd., Vs Mannalal Khandelwal and the State of Maharashtra, (Criminal Writ
Petition No. 1228 of 2004), The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court held that to avoid the delay in
legal proceedings because of unserved summons must be interrupted by using all the practical
methods and services including emails. Summons through e-mail is permitted in In Indian Bank
Association & Ors vs Union Of India & Anr (2014) 5 SCC 590.

Summons though Whatsapp:- In Tata Sons Limited & Ors vs John Does, CS(COMM)
1601/2016, His Lordship Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court permitted
the right to serve summons to the defendant via Whatsapp texts as well as by emails to a
defendant. In a recent case, Justice Surabhi Sharma Vats of the Delhi High Court allowed a
woman to serve the summons to her estranged husband who was living in Australia via
Whatsapp. Moreover, the court considered “double-tick” as valid delivery of summons. In
another case, Bhim Rathke vs Mr. R.K. Sharma on 22 February 2018 Special Judge of Patiala
House Courts, New Delhi dismissed the application of complainant who sought the usage of
email and Whatsapp for serving summons. Rejecting the application, the Hon’ble Court pointed
out that the court system does not have the facility to effect the service through electronic mode.
Curiously enough, it is important to note that claiming the usage of Whatsapp or email is not a
matter of right of the applicant rather it is the discretion of the court to grant permission for the
same. Now-a-days, Computer technology is being advanced day by day, people can take the help
of techno experts to escape any problem which involves technology. The problem is such that
there are various hacked versions of Whatsapp, e-mail etc. in this computer era. I opine that it is
better to use recent technology like Whatsapp in serving summons as a last resort which means
that it may be used when all the other available means are exhausted. However, it cannot be
claimed as a matter of right by the applicant because Indian laws explicitly do not allow it but at
the same time, the interpretation of statutes lies with the court which allows judges to expand the
law.

Service of Summons Abroad:-

7|Page
 International service of foreign judicial and extrajudicial documents is governed in general by
the 1965 Hague Service Convention. Prior to the enactment of the Hague Service Convention,
service of process in civil cases was generally effected by a letter rogatory, a formal request
from the court in the country where proceedings were initiated or underway to a court in another
country where the defendant resided.

In our country, Order V Rule 25 CPC deals with service where defendant resides out of India
and has no agent. Order V Rule 26 provides the procedure to service in foreign territory through
Political Agent or Court. Order V Rule 26-A provides that summons to be sent to officers of
foreign countries. But, in reality, to serve a notice or summons, practically, in total, one would
need to plan for about 4-5 months for effecting service of summons in a foreign country. In civil
or commercial matters, some countries (like Canada, Australia) charge a fee for serving
summons. Most of the parties to the litigation in India do not know the procedure how to contact
Indian Embassy or Consulate to get details in this regard. India is a signatory to the Hague
Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra-Judicial documents in Civil and
Commercial Matters. The formal method for service in India with effect from August 1, 2007 is
pursuant to the Hague Convention. According to this, Indian made certain declarations such as
documents for service must be written in the English language; documents cannot be served via
mail; documents must be served in India indirectly via proper authority; and documents under
the Hague Convention cannot be served directly to the defendants in India by private judicial
officer. See. the website of the Ministry of Law and Justice:lawmin.nic.in .

Procedure when defendant refused to accept service, or cannot be found:- Order V rules 17 and
19 of CPC is relevant to answer this question. “Where the defendant or his agent or such other
person as aforesaid refused to sign the acknowledgement, or where the serving officer, after
using all due and reasonable diligence, cannot find the defendant, who is absent from his
residence at the time when service is sought to be effected on him at his residence within a
reasonable time, and there is no agent empowered to accept service of the summons on his
behalf, nor any other person on whom service can be made, the serving officer shall affix a copy
of the summons on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the house in which the
defendant ordinarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain, and shall then
return the original to the court from which it was issued, with a report endorsed thereon or
annexed thereto stating that he has so affixed the copy, the circumstances under which he did so,
8|Page
 and the name and address of the person (if any) by whom the house was identified and in whose
presence the copy was affixed.” Rule 19 provides that where a summons is returned under r. 17,
the court shall, if the return under that rule has not been verified by the affidavit of the serving
officer, and may, if it has been so verified, examine the serving officer on oath, or cause him to
be so examined by another Court, touching his proceedings, and may make such further enquiry
in the matter as it thinks fit; and shall either declare that the summons has been duly served or
order such service as it thinks fit. See. Dr. K.C. Verma vs Asstt. Cit, (2004) 89 TTJ Del 129.

Presumptions as to service of summons:- Order 5, proviso to Sub-rule (2) of Rule 19A of C.P.C.
provides that where the summons are properly addressed, prepaid and duly sent by registered
post with acknowledgement due, notwithstanding the fact that the acknowledgement having
been lost or mislaid, or for any other reason, has not been received by the Court within thirty
days from the date of the issue of the summons, the Court shall presume that notice is duly
served. Further, Second 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 provides similar provision. The
presumptions are rebuttable. It is always open to the defendants to rebut the presumption by
leading convincing and cogent evidence. See. Basant Singh and Anr. Vs. Roman Catholic
Mission, AIR 2002 SC 3557. It is settled law that once the letter is sent through registered post at
correct address and AD card is received back bearing some signatures, the presumption is drawn
about its service upon the addressee unless the same is rebutted. It is held by Hon’ble High Court
of Delhi in Smt. Bhavneshwari Devi Vs. Kalyan Singh, 1993 (2) RCR (Rent) 330 that
presumption of service arises in law if the acknowledgement card of registered post is received
back bearing signatures of someone. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has gone even a step further
and held that even if the acknowledgement card is lost or does not come back for any reason, the
presumption of service could still be drawn.

In Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu Vs. Union of India – 2005 (6) ALT(D.N.)(SC)
22.4 ( F.B. ). Y.K. SABHARWAL and D.M. DHARMADHIKARI and TARUN
CHATTERJEE,jjj, the Hon’ble Full Bench observed that as per Amendment Act of 1999,
defendant has to file written statement within thirty days from date of SERVICE OF
SUMMONS on him Rigor of this provision was reduced by Amendment Act of 2002 enabling
Court to extend time for filing written statementExtension can be maximum for 90 days
Provision of Order VII! Rule 1 providing for upper limit of 90 days, held, is directory.

9|Page
 When the exact date of service of summons is not with the Court:- In Mirza Liyaquath Hussain
v. G. Srinivas Goud – 2005 (5) ALT 211 , it was observed that Prescribed period of 90 days be
computed from the date of service of suit summons and not from the date of knowledge of filing
suit by defendant. Rejection to receive written statement on the ground that it was filed beyond
90 days from the date of receipt of notice in an interlocutory application filed under Order 38
Rule 5, CPC and his participation therein and from the date of issuance of suit summons is held
to be erroneous. Date of service of suit summons is the date for computing 90 days period. Exact
date of service of summons is not before Court. Even if first date of hearing is taken as starting
point, written statement was filed within time. Petition filed seeking permission to file written
statement is allowed.

Proof of service of summons in divorce O.P :- Service of summons in divorce o.p. on wife is
proved by examining process server and marking copy of summons which bears the signature of
wife. See. Bantu Lavanya v. Bantu Rajeshwer – 2009 (3) ALT 32.

Before permitting substituted service, Court must be satisfied:- As was held in Chandergupt
Arora v. Smt.Shaheen Khan and others – 2009 (6) ALT 451, before permitting substituted
service, Court must be satisfied that either the defendant is purposefully avoiding receipt of
summons or having regard to facts of the case, it is not possible to serve notice – Substituted
service cannot be permitted on the sole ground that premises of defendant were locked at a given
point of time. See also. Yerakareddy Anathareddi v. Smt. Durba Lakshmi Bhavani – 2009 (6)
ALT 113

Service of suit summons to adult member:- When adult female members of defendants refused
to receive suit summons, a conclusion can be drawn that summons are served on defendants in
view of Order 5 Rule 15, CPC.(Para 29)(2) Irregularity in service of summons – Even though
suit summons would have been attempted to be served giving sufficient time to defendants to
appear at the hearing, in view of second proviso to Order 9 Rule 13, CPC, the ex parte decree
should not be set aside by Court on an assumed irregularity in service of summons if the
defendants had notice of date of hearing and had sufficient time to appear and answer the
plaintiff’s claim. See. N. Hanmanth Reddy Vs. Smt. Razia Begum and others – 2013 (5) ALT
417. M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO,j

10 | P a g e
 Service of summons under order 5 rules 1 and 20:- summons issued to the appellant were
returned un-served – as per the nazarath and the endorsement of postal authorities, reason for
non-service of summons is non-availability of the appellant when the summons were about to be
served – despite the correct address given, no steps were taken by the plaintiff in the present suit
to serve the appellant on correct address. (Paras 14 and 15). See. Gulnar Gulabi Vs. Tasneem
Sulthana- 2017 (1) ALT 585. A.V. SESHA SAI,j.

Substituted service:- For ordering substituted service as per Order 5 Rule 20, CPC it must be
shown that the respondent/defendant is keeping out of the way for the purpose of avoiding
service or that for any other reason, the summons cannot be served in the ordinary way. See.
Maganti Krishna Durga Vs. Maganti Anil Kumar – 2015 (5) ALT 346 (D.B.). B SIVA
SANKARA RAO and R. SUBHASH REDDY,jj

Publication of notice in Newspaper:- When service of notice is intended by an advertisement in a

newspaper, the Newspaper shall be a daily Newspaper circulating in the locality in which the
respondent/defendant is last known to have actually and voluntarily resided or carried on
business or personally worked for gain. See. Maganti Krishna Durga’s case.

Substitute service is not due service:- As per Explanation to Article 123 of Limitation Act, 1963,
substitute service under Rule 20 of Order 5, CPC shall not be deemed to be a due service. It was
held in See. Maganti Krishna Durga Vs. Maganti Anil Kumar – 2015 (5) ALT 346 (D.B.).

Publication made by plaintiff in a news paper other than the one ordered by Court:- In Basant
Singh and another v. Roman Catholic Mission – 2003 (1) ALT(SC) 1, it was held that its
publication made by plaintiff in a news paper other than the one ordered by Court. However,
both the said papers are local dailies having wide circulation in the area. Such a publication in
the circumstances of the case is a mere irregularity in service of summons. It would not
invalidate the effect of substituted service.

Non-Service of summons:- It was held in Maganti Krishna Durga’s case that second proviso to
Order 9 Rule 13, CPC makes it obligatory on the appellate court not to interfere with ex parte
decree unless it meets the statutory requirements, showing non-service of summons or where
there is sufficient cause for the wife not appearing before the Court.

11 | P a g e
 Endorsement of process-server:- In Indu Bhushan Vs. Munnu Lal and another – 2008 (3)
ALT(D.N.)(SC) 6.2 (D.B), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that In the case, not one but several
process servers have given notice relating to service and their endorsements were sufficient to
show service of notice relating to appeal. In N. Muthaiah and others Vs. K. Lakshmamma –
1991 (1) ALT 641, it was held that acceptance of endorsement of process-server by Court is
purely a finding of fact. The Court cannot go into the question whether such endorsement is
correct or not.

Effective date of impleadment:- In the ordinary course, impleadment of party would be from
date of order subject to exception in proviso to Section 21 of Limitation Act and further subject
to service of summons. See. Ganapathi (Padala) Suryakumari v.Dr. Erra Ramadevi and another –
2007 (1) ALT 633.

Summary procedure:- In a suit under Order 37, CPC plaintiff shall take steps to serve summons
for judgment even if defendant entered appearance more than 10 days after service of suit
summons provided an ex parte decree was not passed by the date of such appearance. See. Syed
Pasha Vs. G.B. Prahalad Rao – 2006 (1) ALT 200.

Cancellation of decree:- In a suit for cancellation of ex parte decree, plaintiff has to prove not
only non-service of suit summons on him but also the falsity of suit claim. See. P. Ramalaxmi
Vs. Peetala Tatayya and others – 2006 (1) ALT 79. A. GOPAL REDDY,j.

Service of summons in Rent Control cases:- In Bansilal Yadav v. Suraj Chand Bhagat and others
– 2007 (2) ALT 491, it was observed that under rule 22 (4) of rent control rules, making affixure
of summons on the last known place of abode or business without making efforts to tender
service in person or to serve the same on adult member of their family or to send the same by
registered post is not legal.(2) Order of injunction by Rent Controller. Where demised building is
taken possession illegally and is demolished partly, such demolition would not determine the
tenancy when the site of the building continues to exist and Rent Controller has power to order
status quo of structures existing as on that date.(3) Right of tenant illegally evicted – Tenant who

12 | P a g e
 is illegally evicted can seek restoration of possession by filing an application under Section 8 (3)
of Rent Control Rules.

Permission to defend suit:- In summary suits for recovery of money under Order 37, CPC,
period of ten days to file application by defendant seeking permission to defend the suit be
computed from the date of service of summons for judgment and not from the date of service of
suit summons. See. Panduga Veera Reddy v. Bandaru Damodar Reddy and another – 2005 (3)
ALT 417. L. NARASIMHA REDDY,j

Order 5 is applicable to Execution proceedings:- It is not in dispute that the procedure

contemplated for service of notice under Order 5 is made applicable for service of notice in the
execution proceedings also. Pappasani Narayana Reddy v. Mandem Reddappa Reddy, 2004 (5)
ALT 226.

Process server not making repeated efforts to effect personal service on J.Dr.:- Rule 12 of Order
5 requires that wherever it is practicable, service shall be made on the defendant in person,
unless he has an agent empowered to accept service, in which case service on such agent shall be
sufficient, thus the requirement of law is that effort must be made to serve summons personally
on the defendant (judgment debtor). In this case, it was held that service of sale notice on J.Dr.
by affixture is not a valid service under Order 21 Rule 66 (2) in the absence of process server not
making repeated efforts to effect personal service on J.Dr. and in the absence of court ordering to
follow the procedure contemplated under Order 5 Rule 20, CPC on a report of the process
server. See. Pappasani Narayana Reddy v. Mandem Reddappa Reddy, 2004 (5) ALT 226.

Tenant has got right to get ex parte order of eviction set aside on the ground of non-service of
summons on him as required under law. See. Mirza Rasheed All Safavi Vs. G. Bhaskar Rao –
1993 (2) ALT(NRC) 35. See also: A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Rules,
1961, Rule 8(3).

13 | P a g e
 Order 3, Rule 3:- D-2 and D-3 are power of attorney holders of D-1- service of summons on a
recognized agent shall be as effective as on principal party – Hence service on D-1 is effective.

See. Syed Naseeruddin Hasan and another Vs. Mir Ifteqar Ali and others – 1993 (1) ALT(SUPP)
680 (D.B.).

Postal return bearing endorsement of defendant’s refusal:- When there is a postal

acknowledgment signed by the defendant that itself can be treated as sufficient service even if
the summons by post is sent initially but the endorsement by a postal employee of refusal of the
summons sent by registered post cannot be even prima facie proof of service except in a case
where the summons so sent by registered post is after the return of the initial summons unserved.
While acknowledge of service of postal notice could be made proof of service of summons
under Rule 9(3) of Order V and the refusal of the postal notice only when in conformity with
Rule 20-A, there is no provisions for declaring the summons as served when postal notice alone
is taken out initially and it bears the endorsement of refusal. See. Narasamma Vs. Salamma –
1959 (1) ALT(NRC) 63.1.

14 | P a g e
 Conclusion:-

Strict compliance of the procedure under Order V of CPC is one remedies for proper service of
summons. Order V, Rule 19-A CPC is introduced in order to avoid delay in actual service, the
service of summons, through registered A.D. post was inserted. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 19-A is
analoguous to Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. The proof that a letter has been
posted is usually evidence of its delivery under section 16 of the Evidence Act. It is to be
remembered that Order 37 Rules 2 and 3 CPC provided a procedure regarding the service of
summons, that the plaint shall be accompanied along with the annexures. A Court before
ordering substituted service must state the ground on which such service has become necessary
and also must record court’s satisfaction about it. It is regular experience of lawyers and judicial
officers that defendant, sometimes, does not file written statement in time. As was held in
Mohammed Yusuf Vs. Faij Mohammad and others, 2009 (3) SCJ 517 (D.B.), defendants may be
permitted to file written statement after expiry of period of 90 days only on exceptional situation.
Sometimes, service of summons is linked with limitation aspect. As was held in Nivasan Vs.
Peter Jebaraj and another, 2009 (1) ALT(D.N.)(SC) 22.2 (D.B.), Proceedings against defendant
shall be deemed to have begun only from the date of service of summons subject to the provision
of the Limitation Act. For some reasons, when respondent was not duly served with notice, by
reaons substitute of service notice in paper publication or otherwise, the respondent would be set
ex-parte. In case of dealing with setting exparte divorce decrees, it warrants slightly liberal
approach. In N. Hemamalini v. N.A. Raghu – 2008 (1) ALT 458, it was observed that In cases
relating to setting aside of ex-parte decree, the guiding principle would be to give opportunity to
parties to seek adjudication of dispute on merits except where one of them has remained
indifferent for a prolonged period of unexplained delay. Of course, it is always there that Court
should not refuse to condone delay if it is satisfied about the explanation offered by party. Use of
advanced technology, following the procedure established under law, is another important tool
for speedy service of summons on defendant. Each jurisdiction has rules regarding the
appropriate service of process.

I conclude the article with a suggestion that inasmuch as information technology is increasing
day by day, it is time to enact the new legislation and to frame detailed rules for service of

15 | P a g e
 summons, notice, documents through electornic mode and that the training classes for the
process servers must be organized to understand the law and that they also must electronically
log their attempts to serve papers using some kind of GPS device, and keep those records in a
database for at least ten years.

Consecutive to this, the

Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
16 | P a g e
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate

17 | P a g e
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
18 | P a g e
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
19 | P a g e
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended

20 | P a g e
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
21 | P a g e
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th

22 | P a g e
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems

23 | P a g e
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
24 | P a g e
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate

25 | P a g e
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
26 | P a g e
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
27 | P a g e
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended

28 | P a g e
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
29 | P a g e
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th

30 | P a g e
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems

31 | P a g e
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
32 | P a g e
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate

33 | P a g e
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
who
brought the issue to the
notice of ‘Council of States’ in
1927. Consecutive to this, the
34 | P a g e
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
35 | P a g e
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
36 | P a g e
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
who
brought the issue to the
notice of ‘Council of States’ in
1927. Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.

37 | P a g e
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later

38 | P a g e
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended

39 | P a g e
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964.
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
40 | P a g e
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th

41 | P a g e
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems

42 | P a g e
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in
1964
Consecutive to this, the
Government appointed a
‘Drug Enquiry Committee’
under the Chairmanship of
Lt.
Col. RN Chopra in 1930,
which recommended the
formation of a ‘Central
Legislation’
for setting up of suitable
standards. Based on these
recommendations,
Government
has introduced ‘Import of
Drugs Bill’ in Legislative
43 | P a g e
Assembly in August 1937.
This
bill was presented in
Legislative Assembly on
15th March 1940. This was
later
discussed and passed on
5th April 1940. Further, the
same was discussed in the
Council of States and
ultimately passed on 10th
April 1940 under the name of
‘Drugs
Act’. This legislation gave
powers to the Government
to make rules to regulate

44 | P a g e
import, manufacture, sale
and distribution of drugs in
the country. Consecutive to
this, rules were framed during
1945. Later, the scope of the
Drugs Act was extended
to cosmetics in 1962 and the
title of the act was changed
to ‘Drugs & Cosmetics Act’.
The drugs belonging to the
systems of Ayurveda, Siddha
and Unani (ASU) Systems
were brought within the
purview of the D & C Act in 1

45 | P a g e