Proving address of defendant by internet printout

1) If court desires, no harm in serving notice for 3rd time. If want to prove to the court about the validity of the address of respondent, may submit copy of some public document like ration card etc. that has the address of respondent. This may most likely convince the court. Alternatively may submit affidavit along with printout from website of respondent that shows the address. It can also be further confirmed/ strengthened by submitting WHOIS printout from https://whois.icann.org/en

2) If the above does not convince the court, may have to go for subsituted service under Order 5 Rule 20 of CPC.

Thanx for your reply sir

But whois printout shows only the company name and the address and doesnt disclose anything about the manager of the company. It shows someother name as registrant. Otherwise may i know what purpose whois search will serve ?. Ration card and other address proof are not available with the plaintiff. And even if it is good to serve the respondent for the 3rd time, to which address i would have to serve ?. Because i very well know that the address stated in the cause title is the old address from where the respondent has migrated. 

Is there any citation which allows the court to rely upon the affidavit filed for proof of address of the respondent based on internet printout ?. Because these judges are technologically handicapped and in my opinion only a citation can come for help. Anyway i am going to file an affidavit with the printout. But i must be armed with citation so i can counter the judge's rejection in case. 

Finally order 5 rule 20 is substituted service which is the final service stage and the judge will take his own time in permitting it since exparte order follows post publication. This provision is just a formality and in 99% of the cases it doesnt serve any purpose because only publication is ordered and the CNB LKR is not ordered mostly. 

Please read the following. As per the sections 65A and 65B, even the computer soft copy print outs are admissible ad evidnece, but only soft copies and not physical print outs.

65A. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record -

165A.Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record.- The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 65B.

————————-

1. Ins. by Act 21 of 2000, sec. 92 and Sch. II (w.e.f. 17-10-2000).

65B. Admissibility of electronic records -

165B. Admissibility of electronic records.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence of any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.

(2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:—

(a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer during the period over which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer;

(b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities;

(c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and

(d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities.

(3) Where over any period, the function of storing or processing information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by computers, whether—

(a) by a combination of computers operating over that period; or

(b) by different computers operating in succession over that period; or

(c) by different combinations of computers operating in succession over that period; or

(d) in any other manner involving the successive operation over that period, in whatever order, of one or more computers and one or more combinations of computers,

all the computers used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer; and references in this section to a computer shall be construed accordingly.

(4) In any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say,—

(a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced;

(b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer;

(c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate,

and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it.

(5) For the purposes of this section,—

(a) infomation shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;

(b) whether in the course of activities carried on by any official information is supplied with a view to its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that computer, shall be taken to be supplied to it in the course of those activities;

(c) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section any reference to information being derived from other information shall be a reference to its being derived therefrom by calculation, comparison or any other process.

————————-

1. Ins. by Act 21 of 2000, sec. 92 and Sch. II (w.e.f. 17-10-2000).

"It shows someother name as registrant. Otherwise may i know what purpose whois search will serve ?."

Sir, since it shows some other name as registrant, it will probably not serve your purpose. Purpose of WHOIS is only to prove that the website(domain name) is registered in name, address, contact details of Mr. xyz or company xyz. That is it. It does not prove further that it is themselves Mr. xyz or company xyz that registered it in their own name because anyone/ mischief maker can register any website in any name and address. It can only be proved after proper investigation, like payment for buying/ registration of domain name was made from whose account, the website is being managed from which I.P. addresses etc. etc.

The following citation might serve indirectly https://indiankanoon.org/doc/78947881/ Please refer paragraphs 29 and 30 where it says "If the affidavit merely states that the accused is residing at the address without giving any further documentary proof in support thereof such an affidavit cannot be accepted as satisfying the requirement of Section 138". It means if you are submitting documentary proof in support of affidavit, it can be accepted.

It becomes the burden of the complainant to provide proper address, the court will not go behind the accused to produce his address or any alternative suggestion.