Rasiah v. Ranmany and others – 1978_79 volume 2 page 088

In the case between Rasiah (Plaintiff) and Ranmany and others (Defendants), the court addressed the issue of whether service of notice to deposit a specified sum as required by a Supreme Court order was properly effected on the appellant by serving notice on the appellant’s Attorney-at-Law under section 29 of the Civil Procedure Code. It was held that such service was sufficient and, given the appellant’s failure to deposit the fees within the stipulated time, the abatement of the appeal was justified. The principle reaffirmed is that service on the Attorney-at-Law in the prescribed manner fulfills the procedural requirement for notice under the Code. The decision relied on interpretation of section 29 of the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing the significance of procedural compliance in ap