INDIA CEMENTS LIMITED Vs. C GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.The revision petitioner/plaintiff has filed I.A.No.7 of 2008 in O.S.No.209 of 2005 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Erode inter alia praying permission of the Court to grant leave to file and mark the following documents:i) Power of attorney dated 14.9.2005 executed by the plaintiff company in favour of its Assistant Marketing Manager Muthukrishnan.ii) Stockist Agreement dated 8.10.1990 entered into by the 2nd defendant with the plaintiff company and to allow the revision.

(2.) THE first respondent has filed counter (adopted by the second respondent) among other things mentioning that the trial has commenced and the evidence of P.W.I is also over and that P.W.I has admitted in his evidence that the Board of Directors and the petitioner company has not passed any resolution authorizing him to file the suit and he has also admitted that he did not file any petition seeking the permission to represent the plaintiff in the suit and therefore, the application filed under Order 7 Rule 14(3) of C.P.C. is not maintainable and that the alleged power of attorney ought to have been produced at the time of filing of the suit and permission to represent the plaintiff as a power holder should have been filed under Rule 16 of the Civil Rules of Practice and this is the condition precedent and defect cannot be rectified by producing the said power deed at the belated stage of the trial and further that the stockist agreement is one sided and unenforceable in law and this document at a stage of trial cannot be received in trial and that the petitioner cannot be given a chance to fill up the loopholes and hence prays for dismissal of the application.

(3.) IN support of his contention, the learned counsel relied on the decision of K. Subramanian v. S. Balashanmugam 2005 (2) CTC 112 wherein, this Court has held that no explanation has been given for marking the documents when he was already, examined and therefore dismissed the revision petition confirming the order of trial Court in dismissing the petition for recalling the witnesses for marking documents.