This writ petition under Article 227 challenged an order allowing respondent to examine her son via Power of Attorney. The court dismissed the petition, holding that procedural safeguards permit cross-examination to verify qualifications.
Writ petition disposed of with observation that petitioner could challenge evidence via cross-examination.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. M. SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO.51196/2019 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN :
SRI. S MURALIDHAR RAO AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE B.N.SHANKAR RAO, R/AT NO.785, GROUND FLOOR, 8TH B MAIN, 23RD A CROSS, HSR LAYOUT, 7TH SECTOR, BANGALORE-560102
.... PETITIONER
(BY SRI. SHASHI KIRAN V, ADVOCATE)
AND :
SMT. G KRISHNAVENI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, W/O LATE A.GOVINDAN, R/AT NO.110, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD CORSS, 8TH A MAIN ROAD, JAKKASANDRA BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560034.
... RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. T.K.RAJAGOPALA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
2
THE ORDER DATED 28.10.2019 PASSED ON I.A.NO.III FILED UNDER ORDER 3 RULE 2(a) R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC IN O.S.NO.4426/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-F.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
The petitioner is the defendant in
O.S.No.4426/2018 on the file of the VIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (for short, ' the civil Court '). The civil Court by the impugned order has allowed the respondent’s applications (I.A.Nos.III and IV) under Order III Rule 2(a) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, 'CPC' ) and under Order VII Rule 14(a) read with Section 151 of CPC; consequentially, the respondent is permitted to place on record evidence through a Power of Attorney and the Power of Attorney is also taken on record.
3
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's grievance with the impugned order is because the attorney, who is the respondent's son, would not be personally acquainted with the circumstances resulting in execution and registration of the sale deed dated 27.10.2014, and notwithstanding the same, the respondent is permitted to examine this attorney, her son as a witness. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner's grievance is also because the respondent in seeking leave to lead evidence of her son as her attorney, is avoiding entering the witness box and to ensure any confrontation that would be material.
These reasons cannot overwhelm the fact that the respondent would be, given the provisions of Order III Rule 2 of CPC, entitled to be represented through her attorney. If the petitioner could demonstrate either in the cross examination of the attorney or otherwise, that
4
the attorney is not personally acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, he must be entitled to take advantage of the same as would be permissible in law. Similarly, if the respondent does not enter the box and if the petitioner can demonstrate that it is deliberate and to keep out material circumstances out of the records, the petitioner must be at liberty to take advantage of this facet also. However, neither of these reasons would justify interference with the impugned order.
Therefore, the petition stands disposed of with the observation as aforesaid.
SD/- JUDGE
RB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the civil court's order allowing the respondent to lead evidence through a Power of Attorney.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri. S Muralidhar Rao
Smt. G Krishnaveni
B. M. Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
