SMT. NAGALAKSHMAMMA Vs. SRI. DYAVANNA @ DASAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is before this Court, challenging the orders dated 25-02-2012 and 18-11-2015 in O.S.No.191/2008 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge, Hoskote.

(2.) Petitioner is the defendant and respondent is the plaintiff in O.S.No.191/2008 filed to declare that the plaintiff is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the plaint schedule property; declare that the sale deed dated 26-11-1999 is sham and forged document; to cancel the sale deed 26-11-1999 and for injunction. The plaintiff executed Special Power of Attorney in favour of his son to represent in the suit and to prosecute the suit. Based on the said Special Power of Attorney, the son of the plaintiff filed an application under Order 3, Rule 2(A) read with section 151 of CPC seeking permission of the Court to conduct the case on behalf of the plaintiff. As the defendant submitted no objection, the said application came to be allowed by an order dated 25-02-2012. Thereafter, the Special Power of Attorney holder examined himself as P.W.1 on behalf of the plaintiff and marked the documents on 06-07-2012. The defendant on 18-03-2015 filed an I.A. under section 151 of CPC to discard the evidence of P.W.1 and to direct the plaintiff to appear personally before the Court and to give evidence, which application was opposed by the plaintiff by filing objections. The trial Court by its order dated 18-11-2015 rejected the said application. The defendant is before this Court, challenging both the orders dated 25-02-2012 as well as 18- 11-2015 in this writ petition.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent and perused the writ papers.