9911796707
TMI Blog1950 (12) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt. The District Munsif returned the plaint as he found that the subject-matter of the suit was beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of that Court. The plaint so returned was represented in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Chitoor. One Narayanaswami Naidu claiming to be the power of attorney agent of plaintiffs 1 and 2 gave a fresh vakalat to the advocate on 2-61945 and it was duly accepted by him. The defendants raised the contention that under the power of attorney given to Narayanaswami Naidu, no power was conferred on him to engage an advocate or conduct a suit in the Subordinate Judge's Court. The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the contention of the defendants and dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs have preferred this appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the entire document is extracted: Special power of attorney executed and delivered on 23-11-1943 by the following two individuals, namely, Paliyagar Meghavarnam Nayanim Varu's sons (1) Desappa Nayanim Varu and (2) Ponnusami Nayanim Varu, Kshatriya Pliyagara, landlords residents of village of Nagarj attached to Puthur Sub-Registry, Chittoor. Cuddapah registration District, in favour of Kasala Narayanaswami Naidu, son of Abbayi Naidu alias Mutyalu Naidu, Balija, cultivator resident of Kothuru, hamlet of Mangadu village, attached to the aforesaid registration sub-district, is as follows : We had filed a suit for possession of lands and for recovery of past profits in O. S. No. 314 of 1943 on the file of the Court of the District Munsif of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for them to conduct the same personally they appointed Narayanaswami Naidu as an agent to conduct the said suit. He is also authorised to conduct the entire proceedings which, have to be taken in the said suit. The document therefore confers an express power on Narayanaswami Naidu to conduct a particular suit pending in a particular Court. It does not expressly engage the attorney for the purpose of conducting the litigation generally in respect of the plaint schedule properties. But Mr. Ramaswami Ayyangar argued that such power must be inferred by necessary implication; as if the plaint is returned for want of jurisdiction or for any other similar reason, some such power is necessary to enable the power of attorney to re-present the plaint ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
