GOWTHAM SAMPATH Vs. GURDIP SINGH SANDHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.R.PNo.4742 of 2017 is filed against the fair and decreetal order dtd. 30/8/2017 made in I.A.No.1017 of 2017 in I.A.No.530 of 2014 in O.S.No.588 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu. C.R.PNo.4743 of 2017 is filed against the fair and decreetal order dtd. 30/8/2017 made in I.A.No.1019 of 2017 in I.A.No.844 of 2012 in O.S.No.588 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu.

(2.) The issues and the parties involved in both the Civil Revision Petitions are one and the same and hence, they are disposed of by this common order.

(3.) The petitioners are plaintiff in O.S.No.588 of 2007 on the file of the Principal District Court, Kancheepuram District, Chengalpattu. They filed the said suit for specific performance of agreement of sale dtd. 14/11/2004, against one Major Harbhajan Singh Sandhu. The said defendant remained exparte and exparte decree was passed on 17/4/2008. The petitioners filed E.PNo.28 of 2008 for execution of sale deed and sale deed dtd. 15/7/2009 was executed by the Court on behalf of the defendant Major Harbhajan Singh Sandhu, which was registered as Document No.2973/2009 at Sub Registrar Office, Thiruporur. The petitioners filed E.PNo.10 of 2012 for delivery of possession of suit property and the same is pending. The respondent herein, son of the defendant, filed 4 applications through his Power Agent viz., Harish G.Dave, in I.A.No.842 of 2012 to recognize HarishG.Dave, as power agent of the respondent, I.A.No.843 of 2012 to implead the respondent by power agent Harish G.Dave, as party 2nd defendant in the suit, I.A.No.844 of 2012 to condone the delay of 1445 days in filing the application for setting aside the exparte decree passed on 17/4/2008 and unnumbered application to set aside the exparte decree dtd. 17/4/2008 in the suit. In the said applications filed by the power agent, the petitioners filed counter affidavits, contending that the power agent cannot represent the principals in respect of the events that took place prior to execution of sale deed and application for impleading under Order I Rule 10 (2) of C.P.C., is not maintainable. While so, the counsel for the power agent made endorsement "As the Principal Gurdeep Singh Sandhu has came from Muscat this petition by Power agent is not pressed. May be dismissed" in I.A.Nos. 842 of 2014, filed to recognise Harish G.Dave as power agent and "This petition may be dismissed as not pressed as the principal has filed a petition under Order 22 Rule 3 of C.P.C." in I.A.No.843 of 2014, filed to implead the respondent as party 2nd defendant in the suit. Recording the endorsement, those two I.A.s were dismissed.