Petitioner also argues that it is not necessary to present the postmaster’s certification.  Petitioner maintains that the annotations on the  mail envelope “can stand on equal footing with and have similar evidentiary value as a postmaster’s certification.” Petitioner stresses that since Anita’s counsel filed the petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals only on 17 August 1999 or more than 60 days from 28 February 1999, the Resolution “has already assumed finality and the Court of Appeals has no jurisdiction over that petition.”   These arguments are erroneous.  Section 9, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides:   Service of judgments, final orders or resolutions.  — Judgments, final orders or resolutions shall be served either personally or by registered mail.  x  x  x     Section 10 of the same Rule provides:               Completeness of service.  —  Personal service is complete upon actual delivery.  Service by ordinary mail is complete upon the expiration of ten (10) days after mailing, unless the court otherwise provides.  Service by registered mail is complete upon actual receipt by the addressee, or after five (5) days from the date he received the first notice of the postmaster, whichever date is earlier.               The rule on service by registered mail contemplates two situations:  (1) actual service the completeness of which is determined upon receipt by the addressee of the registered mail and (2) constructive service the completeness of which is determined upon expiration of five days from the date the addressee received the first notice of the postmaster.             In the present case, there is no proof of actual receipt of the notice of the registered mail by Anita’s counsel.  Petitioner merely relied on the  envelope which bore the notations “Return to Sender Unclaimed,” “Second Notice 2-23,”