Deemed Service by Registered Post Upholds Ejectment Decree Despite 'ND' Endorsement

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Joymalya Bagchi heard the civil appeal arising from SLP(C) No.26340/2017 challenging the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad's setting aside of an ejectment decree. The principal question was whether a notice terminating tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, sent by registered post but returned with the postal endorsement “ND” (Not Delivered), could be treated as duly served under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.

The Court allowed the appeal and restored the ejectment decree passed by the trial court. It held that service by registered post is “deemed to be effected” once the letter was properly addressed, prepaid and posted, unless the contrary was proved, and that the High Court erred in setting aside the decree solely because the postal cover bore the endorsement “ND”. The Court noted that the High Court’s conclusion proceeded without consideration of Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and relevant precedents which treated dispatch by registered post as sufficient for service. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “Undisputedly, notice was sent to the respondent by Registered Post in compliance with Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The High Court, as we have observed, held that since the endorsement on the notice read ‘ND’, the notice was not delivered and, therefore, any and all proceedings arising therefrom would be bad in law and, hence, the decree of ejectment was set aside. We are of the view that the High Court was plainly in error in coming to this conclusion. The impugned order was passed without consideration of Section 27 of GC Act, which provides that if services are made through Registered Post, it is deemed to have been made in accordance with law.” The Court directed the tenant to vacate and hand over possession and to clear arrears within three months.

Background

The landlord sued for ejectment and recovery of arrears after the tenant defaulted in rent from June 1999 to September 2000. The landlord issued notices by registered A.D. post on 12 September 2000 and 1 November 2000 demanding payment and possession. Proceedings before the Civil Judge, Hathras, ran largely ex parte after the tenant failed to file a written statement and did not pursue several adjournments; the trial court struck off defence and decreed the suit on 27 May 2011, directing the tenant to “vacate the disputed property and hand over the peaceful possession to the plaintiff within one month” and to deposit arrears and mesne profits.

The tenant challenged the decree before the High Court contending that the Section 106 notice was not served because the registered letters were returned with endorsement “ND”. The High Court set aside the ejectment decree on that ground. The Supreme Court examined Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and consistent precedents (including C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Mouhammed and other authorities) holding that posting a pre-paid registered letter containing the notice ordinarily sufficed for service and constituted “deemed service.” Finding no jurisdictional defect, failure of procedure or denial of opportunity warranting revisional interference, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, restored the trial court decree, and ordered compliance within three months. The Registry was directed to send a copy of this judgment to the High Court Registrar for transmission to the trial court. Pending applications stood disposed of.

Case Details: Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9518 OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.26340/2017) Case Title: KRISHNA SWAROOP AGARWAL (DEAD) THR. LR. … APPELLANT VERSUS ARVIND KUMAR … RESPONDENT Appearances: (List advocates if available, for both sides using the format) For the Petitioner(s): [Not indicated in judgment] For the Respondent(s): [Not indicated in judgment]