The civil revision petition is filed impugning the order of the Court below, dated 04.01.2017, passed in I.A.No.1 of 2016 in O.S.No.168 of 2007, on the file of the Principal District Court, Madurai.
2. The above said application has been preferred by the third plaintiff, seeking permission to represent by his power agent, namely, S.Senguttuvan in the suit proceedings. A copy of the power deed is also found to have been enclosed by the third plaintiff along with the petition in support of his case. The said application was resisted by the revision petitioner on the footing that the third plaintiff is not entitled to be represented by his power agent, he being a foreign citizen and therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed.
3. The Court below, on a consideration of the rival contentions put forth by the respective parties, finding that the third plaintiff residing in Canada has executed a power deed in favour of S.Senguttuvan to represent him in the suit proceedings and the power deed also having not been disputed or denied by the other side, held that the third plaintiff is entitled to be represented by the power agent in the suit proceedings. Impugning the same, the present civil revision petition is filed.
4. Considering the reasons given by the Court below in entertaining the application and also the fact that inasmuch as the power deed has not been controverted by the other side, it is found that the Court below has allowed the application and hence, I am of the opinion that the impugned order does not call for any interference from this Court.
5. Resultantly, the civil revision petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed.
To:
The Principal District Judge, Madurai.
.