Vendra Sarojini , Gudala Sarojini v. Gudala Madhava Kumar

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5331 of 2016 ORDER:

This Revision is filed challenging the order dt.15-02-2016 in I.A.No.589 of 2015 in O.S.No.87 of 2009 of the Senior Civil Judge, Tanuku.

2.

The petitioner herein is defendant in the said suit. The respondent filed the suit against petitioner for recovery of possession of plaint schedule property, for damages and grant of interest thereon. 3.

The petitioner filed I.A.No.589 of 2015 stating that she fell ill, that she is unable to move and so she gave General Power of Attorney to one V.Rajendra Prasad, her nephew, to give evidence on her behalf as General Power of Attorney holder.

4.

Respondent filed counter opposing this application taking a plea that the General Power of Attorney holder cannot depose in respect of acts done by the principal/defendant in respect of matters, which only the defendant can have knowledge.

5.

By order dt.15-02-2016, the Court below dismissed the said application on the ground that if the nephew of the defendant is allowed to give evidence, the respondent/plaintiff will loose an opportunity to cross-examine the defendant, who is one of the attestors of Will Ex.A-1. It also held that the General Power of

MSR,J C.R.P.No.5331 of 2016 Attorney holder is not a competent person to give evidence on behalf of the defendant.

6.

There is no dispute about the legal position that a General Power of Attorney holder cannot become a witness on behalf of a party, but he can appear in his own capacity and give evidence in respect of matters within his personal knowledge. It is also settled law that he cannot depose for the acts done by the principal and he cannot depose on behalf of principal in respect of matters of which only the principal can have personal knowledge and in respect of which the principal is liable to be cross-examined (A.C. Narayanan; G.Kamalakar Vs. State of Mahasashtra and another1). 7.

Having regard to this decision of the Supreme Court, while no objection can be taken to the order of the trial Court dismissing the application filed by the General Power of Attorney holder of the petitioner to give evidence on behalf of petitioner/defendant, if the General Power of Attorney holder intends to give evidence only in his personal capacity with regard to the facts within his personal knowledge and in respect of the acts done by him and not with regard to the acts done by the defendant, the Court below may permit him to be examined as a witness on behalf of defendant. 8.

The Civil Revision Petition is dismissed with the above observations. No costs.

1 2013 Law Suits (SC) 808

MSR,J C.R.P.No.5331 of 2016 9.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO Date: 27-01-2017 Vsv/*