Anjali vs. Jiwan Bihari Lal & others RSA No. 175 of 2023 24.03.2026 Present: Mr. Vishwash Kaushal, Advocate, for the appellant. Respondent No.1 is stated to have expired. Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Jaswal, Advocate, for respondent No.4. CMP No. 4855 of 2026 The present application has been filed seeking permission for substituted service upon respondents No. 2 and 3. It has been averred in the application that the applicant made sincere efforts to trace the correct addresses of the said respondents, however, despite best efforts, their whereabouts could not be ascertained. It is further stated that the said respondents were earlier served and were subsequently proceeded against ex parte by both the Courts below. I have gone through the contents of the application. The reasons assigned therein appear to be plausible. In view of the averments as made in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the present application is allowed. Consequently, the present application is allowed. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are ordered to be served by way of substituted service through publication in the newspaper Divya Himachal, having circulation in the concerned local area. Requisite steps, including deposit of publication charges, be taken by the applicant within a period of two weeks from today. List the matter after two weeks. (Romesh Verma) Judge March 24, 2026 (Nisha)