2006 (8) TMI 621 - HC - Indian Laws

Power of Attorney Holder Cannot Testify for Authorizer's Personal Knowledge

Smt. Sharadamma W/O Late Gangaiah Versus Smt. Kenchamma W/O Late Gangaiah

The Supreme Court clarified that a power of attorney holder cannot depose on matters within the authorizer's personal knowledge. The court upheld the ... - Issues involved: Writ petition challenging the rejection of an application in a pending suit for directions to the plaintiff to either give evidence in person or allow cross-examination.Summary:The writ petition was filed by the second defendant in a pending suit where the plaintiff, claiming to be the wife of the deceased, had executed a power of attorney for the suit's conduct. The petitioner sought directions for the plaintiff to depose in person or allow cross-examination, which was rejected, leading to the present petition. The petitioner argued that the plaintiff cannot lead evidence through a power of attorney, citing a Supreme Court judgment. The Supreme Court clarified that a power of attorney holder can only act within the authorized scope and cannot depose on matters within the authorizer's personal knowledge.The court emphasized that the duty of the court is to appreciate the case based on the evidence presented and not to direct parties on how to conduct their case. The request for cross-examination of the plaintiff was deemed inappropriate as it can only follow the chief-examination, which had not occurred. The court upheld the trial court's rejection of the application, stating that the petitioner can conduct their defense as per the law but cannot compel the plaintiff to act in a specific manner. Ultimately, the writ petition was rejected.