IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1033 of 2008 SURESH PASWAN Versus SURJDEO PASWAN ----------- 2 22.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Apparently, if the age of Rajesh Kumar Paswan, the person who is said to have been validly served the summon on behalf of the petitioner is taken to be 12 years as shown in the School Leaving Certificate, the requirement of law under 5 rule l5 of the Code of Civil Procedure can not be said to have been complied inasmuch as service of notice in such case has to be served on an adult member of the family. This is, however, not clear from the impugned order as to whether aforementioned School Leaving Certificate or any fact with regard to Rajesh Kumar Paswan being minor was specifically pleaded and established. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the court below to reconsider the issue and if it is found that only mode of service of notice on the petitioner was through service shown to have been effected on his minor son Rajesh Kumar Paswan, the court below will definitely recall the order fixing ex-parte hearing and thereafter will proceed in accordance with law. This civil revision application is accordingly, disposed of. shahid (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)