R ARJUNAN Vs. ARUNACHALA GOUNDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is filed against the order passed under Order 3 Rule 3 read with 151 C. P. C.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the Revision petition are as follows :

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that the order of the Lower Court suffers from material irregularity in exercise of its jurisdiction. He further submitted that Civil Procedure Code provides that the party can be represented by his Power Agent and that there is no prohibition to represent on behalf of the Principal even in Execution Proceedings for the alleged violation of injunction order. He further submitted that the Power Agent will only put forth the defence of the judgment debtor and that any order passed in the Execution Proceedings will be binding on the judgment debtor. Even in the suit, the Power Agent has represented the judgment debtor and that there was no objection for the same. Therefore, the order of the Lower Court, that the judgment debtor cannot be represented in Execution Proceedings and she must file her pleadings in person is incorrect.