JAIPAL WADHWANI Vs. ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:

(2.) It is submitted by counsel for petitioner that defendant Smt. Prema Payasi had not entered in the witness box and her Power of Attorney holder had appeared on her behalf, therefore, application under Sec. 151 of C.P.C. was filed for compelling defendant Smt. Prema Payasi to appear as a witness. However, by impugned order dtd. 22/2/2024, the said application has been rejected. Similarly, it is submitted that application under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC was filed to verify that who is in possession of property in dispute. However, the said application has been rejected by order dtd. 28/2/2024.

(3.) It is submitted that since it is necessary to verify that who is in possession of property in dispute, therefore, the Court should have appointed the local Commissioner. It is further submitted that it is well established principle of law that holder of Power of Attorney cannot depose for and on behalf of the principal in respect of the act, which was not done by Power of Attorney holder.