1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.233 of 2025 Date of Decision : 17.12.2025 Heena Sharma …… Petitioner Versus Rajesh Kumar ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Ms. Tanu Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents : Nemo. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) In the case at hand, summons to the sole respondent had been issued on 19.05.2025. The same were received back un-served. As per report of service, the respondent was stated to be serving at Shimla. Hence, fresh steps were ordered to be taken vide order dated 30.06.2025. Thereafter, notices issued to the sole respondent which were received back un-served, as it had been pointed out that the addressee has left the given address about 4-5 years ago. In view thereof, fresh steps were to be taken for the service of the sole respondent in terms of order dated 01.08.2025. However, till date no fresh steps have been taken. 2. In terms of Order 9 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, when summons have been returned back un-served, then it is imperative for the petitioner to apply for fresh issuance of summons within seven days from the 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 date of return and if the needful is not done, the same would necessitate dismissal of the petition. 3. In view thereof, present petition is dismissed, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) December 17, 2025 (KS) Judge