HALKI BAI RAGHUVANSHI Vs. BHAGAT SINGH RAGHUVANSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This misc. petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner/defendant by taking exception to the order dated 19- 09-2025 passed by 4 Civil Judge, Junior Division, District Vidisha (M.P.) in RCSA No.03/2022, whereby Trial Court rejected the application under Order 16 Rule 1 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC filed by petitioner/defendant wherein on the basis of power of attorney, petitioner/defendant appointed her husband to give the statement on her behalf.

(2.) It is submitted by learned Counsel for petitioner/defendant that respondent Nos. 1 to 3/plaintiff filed a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants. During pendency of the suit, defendant has filed an application under Order 16 Rule 1 read with Sec. 151 of the CPC for seeking permission to record statement of her husband on her behalf on the basis of power of attorney executed by defendant/wife in favour of her husband. Thereafter, plaintiff/respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed reply. After hearing argument of both the parties, Trial Court rejected the application.

(3.) Being aggrieved with the impugned order, this petition has been preferred by the petitioner and submitted that Trial Court has committed grave error in passing the impugned order. It is settled principle that if wife is not able to give the statement due to any issue i.e her old age or not understand the questions and give the answer whereas husband may give the statement on behalf of defendant's/wife but Trial Court did not consider this aspect and ignored provision of the Evidence Act, has out rightly rejected the application filed by the petitioner. In such circumstances, the impugned order deserves to be set-aside and directed the Trial Court to take evidence of her husband on her behalf.