SARAS GOPI Vs. BINA DEEGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to the orders dtd. 7/7/2023, and 10/7/2023 in SC. Suit No.1233 of 2017, passed by Additional Session Judge, 62nd Court and City Civil Court, Bombay, thereby refusing to fix fresh date for having video conference call with defendant No.1 to ascertain voluntariness of execution of the consent terms. The petitioner is also challenging order passed by the City Civil Court directing the petitioner to hand over copy of the application at Exhibit-27 to the power of attorney of defendant No.1 and to the erstwhile advocate of defendant No.1.

(2.) The petitioner is original defendant No.1 in a suit filed by respondent No.1/plaintiff, seeking a declaration of title with regard to property described in paragraph No.4 of the plaint. It appears that the defendant No.1 was represented by power of attorney holder (son). The power of attorney dated 20 th July 2021 confered right to perform and execute acts and dates mentioned in clauses 1 to 8 of the said power of attorney. On perusal of the power of attorney it is evident that no interest or title in the property was transferred to the power of attorney holder but he was appointed to act for on behalf of defendant No.1 to defend all proceedings against defendant No.1. By deed of revocation dtd. 21/4/2023, defendant No.1 revoked the power of attorney.

(3.) It appears that the plaintiff had placed on record of City Civil Court settlement agreement purportedly executed on 21/4/2023. By the said settlement agreement, City Civil Court was requested to pass decree in terms of settlement agreement.