The only exception is where the defendant appears on the presentation of the plaint and admits the plaintiff’s claim; and in that case no such summons shall be issued. Every such summons shall be signed by the Judge or such officer as he appoints, and shall be sealed with the seal of the court.
Where a summons has been issued, the Court may direct the defendant to file the written statement of his defence, if any, on the date of his appearance and cause an entry to be made to that effect in the summons. (S. 27 and Order V, Rule 1).
[(1) When a suit has been duly instituted, a summons may be issued to the defendant to appear and answer the claim and to file the written statement of his defence, if any, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on that defendant:
Provided that no such summons shall be issued when a defendant has appeared at the presentation of plaint and admitted the plaintiff’s claim:
Provided further that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the staid period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same on such other day as may be specified by the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, but which shall not be later than ninety days from the date of service of summons], [Order V, Rule 1 (1).]
A summons mentioning wrong date for appearance or appearance on a day when the court is closed is not a summons as required under Order V, Rule 1. No law or procedure requires the defendant to appear on the next following date in such cases. The date given in the summons is its essential ingredient.
Refusal to Acknowledge Service-effect:
The ex parte decree was held to be rightly passed where the defendant refused to put her sign or thumb impression on summons when they were handed to her and she also refused to acknowledge the registered service.