1.

Where the whereabouts of the defendant is unknown, summons may be served by publication
in any action and the rule obviously does not distinguish whether the action is in personam, in
rem, or in quasi in rem. The tenor of the rule authorizes summons by publication whatever the
action maybe as long as the identity of the defendant is unknown or his whereabouts are
unknown.

2. No, the contention of the defendant cannot be sustained. Service of summons maybe done by
substituted service to acquire jurisdiction over the person. If it be effected at defendant’s house
or residence, it should be left with a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein and
must have the relation of confidence to the defendant. A twin brother, in the instant case, can
likely qualify to a person of suitable age and discretion and has a relation of confidence with the
defendant.

As such, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant has been acquired.

3. The next move would be to ask the court for the service of summons by extra-territorial service.
This is applicable herein because the action relates to, or the subject of which is the property
within the Philippines on which the defendant has claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent.
Also, the property of the defendant has been attached in the Philippines. Hence, service of
summons upon A maybe effected by extra-territorial service.