Power of attorney can file a suit in court
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 November 2011
This query is : Resolved
here the problem is:
Firm X is a registered proprietor firm and is a manufacturing firm..
Now Company Y buy some goods from firm X and after some period says that material is not of standard quality and not agreed to pay the cost of Goods Buyed..
Now the problem in above facts...is...
Firm X want to file a case in court regarding the cost of Goods Sold by Power of Attorney Holder..
1. Is it possible to file a suit in court to represent firm by power of attorney holder and The Proprietor can waive himself to appear from court...
2. The power of attorney holder is person like manager in firm....who is well known of facts regarding material/goods sold.
I have heard from some advocates that power of attorney holder cannot represent case or file suit on behalf of proprietor firm to recover the cost of goods sold?
Is it true???
ajay sethi
(Expert) 30 November 2011
you cna afford lawyer fees . engage a lawyer
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 30 November 2011
no you heard wrongly.,
there is two kinds of power of attorney.,
1.) GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY and
2.) SPECIFIC POWER OF ATTORNEY
If you have GPA mean you file suit on behalf of your original owner., like to sale, lease, mortgage, enter in to other agreement or face litigation etc.,
if you have power of attorney to do some one particular act only mean you can do that only., can not do any thing apart from that.,
Rajeev Kumar
(Expert) 30 November 2011
Yes through power of attorney one can file a suit
Guest
(Expert) 30 November 2011
Completely agreed with my ld. friend Adv. Tom
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 30 November 2011
THOUGH MR.SETHI RIGHTLY REFUSED TO ANSWER YOU ON A VALID GROUND BUT AS ADVISE GIVEN BY MR.TOM IS CORRECT I SHOW MY ASSENT TO IT.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 30 November 2011
thank you experts.. this author should be a layman only.. so only i answered himm
dear author if your stated facts are true mean i advised you consult with a good advocate..
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 30 November 2011
POA is allowed for unnatural persons only but still the provision of evidence act will prevail so the donee of POA can not depose for the matters not known to him and not happened before him.
Other wise any defense advocate will tear apart the testimony.
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 30 November 2011
and for those who jump to the conclusions in favor of donee of POA,pl go through the recent judgment of SC , imp portion produced below=
22.The reasons why hearsay evidence is not received as relevant evidence are: (a) the person giving such evidence does not feel any responsibility. The law requires all evidence to be given under personal responsibility, i.e., every witness must give his testimony, under such circumstance, as expose him to all the penalties of falsehood. If the person giving hearsay evidence is cornered, he has a line of escape by saying "I do not know, but so and so told me", (b) truth is diluted and diminished with each repetition 36
and (c) if permitted, gives ample scope for playing fraud by saying "someone told me that...........". It would be attaching importance to false rumour flying from one foul lip to another. Thus statement of witnesses based on information received from others is inadmissible.
Bench: S Kapadia, M Sharma, K P Radhakrishnan, S Kumar, A R Dave
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4820 OF 2007
Kalyan Kumar Gogoi ... Appellant Versus
Ashutosh Agnihotri and another ... Respondents JUDGMENT
J.M. Panchal, J.
...................................J. [J.M. Panchal]
.....................................J. [Gyan Sudha Misra]
New Delhi;
January 18, 2011.
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 30 November 2011
and there is further specific direction by SC GIVEN BELOW=
Order III, Rules 1 and 2 CPC, empowers the holder of power of
attorney to "act" on behalf of the principal. In our view the word "acts"
employed in Order III, Rules 1 and 2 CPC, confines only in respect of
"acts" done by the power of attorney holder in exercise of power
granted by the instrument. The term "acts" would not include
deposing in place and instead of the principal. In other words, if the
power of attorney holder has rendered some "acts" in pursuance to
power of attorney, he may depose for the principal in respect of such
acts, but he cannot depose for the principal for the acts done by the
principal and not by him. Similarly, he cannot depose for the principal
in respect of the matter which only the principal can have a personal
knowledge and in respect of which the principal is entitled to be
cross-examined.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 November 2011
Thanks JSDN i think you rule out my problem..
So I have been correctly informed by an advocate...
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 02 December 2011
Principally we experts have decided not to answer queries raised by such type of persons but some experts are not following this decision so what should we do ???
