[Where after a summons has been issued to the defendant, or to one of several defendants, and returned unserved the plaintiff fails, for a period of ] [Substituted by Act 24 of 1920, Section 2, for the original sub-rule (1).] [seven days] [Substituted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999, Section 19, for " one month" (w.e.f. 1.7.2002).] [from the date of the return made to the Court by the officer ordinarily certifying to the Court returns made by the serving officers, to apply for the issue of a fresh summons the Court shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, unless the plaintiff has within the said period satisfied the Court that-

he has failed after using his best endeavours to discover the residence of the defendant, who has not been served, or

such defendant is avoiding service of process, or

there is any other sufficient cause for extending the time, in which case the Court may extend the time for making such application for such period as it thinks fit.]

In such case the plaintiff may (subject to the law of limitation) bring a fresh suit. [Substituted by Act 24 of 1920, Section 2, for the original sub-rule (1).]

High Court Amendments-[Bombay].- In Order IX, in rule 5, for sub-rule (1), the following shall be substituted, namely:"5. (1) Dismissal of suit where plaintiff after summons returned unserved fails for two months to apply for fresh summons.-Where, after a summons has been issued to the defendant, or to one of several defendants, and returned unserved, the plaintiff fails, for a period of two months from the next hearing of the suit to apply for issue of a fresh summons the Court, shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, unless the plaintiff has within the said period satisfied the Court that (a) he has failed, after using his best endeavour to discover the residence of the defendant who has not been served, or (b) such defendant is avoiding service of process, or (c) there is any other sufficient cause for extending the time, in which case the Court may extend the time for making such application for such period as it thinks fit."-(31-12-1987). [Kerala].-In Order 9, in rule 5 (i) for the existing marginal note the following shall be substituted, namely:- "Dismissal of suit where plaintiff fails to apply for steps." (ii) in sub-rule (1) for the words "three months from the date of the return made to the Court by the officer ordinarily certifying to the Court returns made by the serving officers" the words "one month from the next hearing of the suit or from the notice regarding the non-service of summons given by the Court to the plaintiff or his counsel" shall be substituted.-(9-6-1959). [Orissa]Substitute the following for the existing rule 5: "5. Dismissal of suit where plaintiff, after summons returned unserved, fails to file necessary requisites for fresh summons. (1) where after summons have been issued to the defendant, or to one of similar defendants, and returned unserved, the plaintiff fails to file necessary requisites for the issue of a fresh summons within the period fixed by the Court it shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, and (2) in such a case the plaintiff may (subject to the law of limitation) bring a fresh suit. "- (3-5-1968). [N.B.-These High Court Amendments relate to the provisions as existed before the 1999 Amendment Act.]

[Where after a summons has been issued to the defendant, or to one of several defendants, and returned unserved the plaintiff fails, for a period of ] [Substituted by Act 24 of 1920, Section 2, for the original sub-rule (1).] [seven days] [Substituted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999, Section 19, for " one month" (w.e.f. 1.7.2002).] [from the date of the return made to the Court by the officer ordinarily certifying to the Court returns made by the serving officers, to apply for the issue of a fresh summons the Court shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, unless the plaintiff has within the said period satisfied the Court that-

he has failed after using his best endeavours to discover the residence of the defendant, who has not been served, or

such defendant is avoiding service of process, or

there is any other sufficient cause for extending the time, in which case the Court may extend the time for making such application for such period as it thinks fit.]

In such case the plaintiff may (subject to the law of limitation) bring a fresh suit. [Substituted by Act 24 of 1920, Section 2, for the original sub-rule (1).]

High Court Amendments-[Bombay].- In Order IX, in rule 5, for sub-rule (1), the following shall be substituted, namely:"5. (1) Dismissal of suit where plaintiff after summons returned unserved fails for two months to apply for fresh summons.-Where, after a summons has been issued to the defendant, or to one of several defendants, and returned unserved, the plaintiff fails, for a period of two months from the next hearing of the suit to apply for issue of a fresh summons the Court, shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, unless the plaintiff has within the said period satisfied the Court that (a) he has failed, after using his best endeavour to discover the residence of the defendant who has not been served, or (b) such defendant is avoiding service of process, or (c) there is any other sufficient cause for extending the time, in which case the Court may extend the time for making such application for such period as it thinks fit."-(31-12-1987). [Kerala].-In Order 9, in rule 5 (i) for the existing marginal note the following shall be substituted, namely:- "Dismissal of suit where plaintiff fails to apply for steps." (ii) in sub-rule (1) for the words "three months from the date of the return made to the Court by the officer ordinarily certifying to the Court returns made by the serving officers" the words "one month from the next hearing of the suit or from the notice regarding the non-service of summons given by the Court to the plaintiff or his counsel" shall be substituted.-(9-6-1959). [Orissa]Substitute the following for the existing rule 5: "5. Dismissal of suit where plaintiff, after summons returned unserved, fails to file necessary requisites for fresh summons. (1) where after summons have been issued to the defendant, or to one of similar defendants, and returned unserved, the plaintiff fails to file necessary requisites for the issue of a fresh summons within the period fixed by the Court it shall make an order that the suit be dismissed as against such defendant, and (2) in such a case the plaintiff may (subject to the law of limitation) bring a fresh suit. "- (3-5-1968). [N.B.-These High Court Amendments relate to the provisions as existed before the 1999 Amendment Act.]