Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1956 (12) TMI 47

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fication of accounts, culpable negligence, etc., against the defendants. The plaintiff is one Colonel A. Stuart Lewis. The suit was instituted on his behalf by one V. G. Pai who professed to be acting under a power of attorney given by the plaintiff, and, on the strength of that power of attorney, he executed the Vakalatnama, signed the plaint and also signed the verification of the plaint on behalf of the plaintiff. The defendants-petitioners objected and the learned Subordinate Judge, upon the view that the power of attorney simpliciter was sufficient to entitle Pai to sign the Vakalatnama, the plaint and also the verification, dismissed the defendants objections. Against that order, the present Rule was obtained by the petitioner. 3. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he person verifying must be 'proved to the satisfaction of the court to be acquainted with the facts of the case'. Verification of pleadings is an important matter which may have very serious consequences, as in case of false verification, the person verifying may be liable to criminal prosecution. The object of verification, as it has been pointed out in decisions of courts, is to fix responsibility on the party verifying and to prevent false pleadings, being recklessly filed or false allegations being recklessly made. It must have some sanctity and for that purpose the rule makes provision by insisting upon the competency of the person verifying where he is somebody other than the actual party concerned by requiring him to prove t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gations, it is only proper in the circumstances of the present case, that the plaintiff should be required to verify the plaint himself so that he may accept full responsibility for it under the law and comply with the letter and spirit of the rules of pleading in that behalf. 6. It is true that in this court the plaintiff opposite party has filed an affidavit, accepting full responsibility for the statements in the plaint and also Pai's verification of the same, but that, in our opinion, will not, in the circumstances of this case, be sufficient compliance with the rules of verification, laid down in the Code. 7. We, accordingly, make this Rule absolute in part, that is, so far as the verification is concerned and direct that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates