C.R. No.7326 of 2010 (O&M) -1- ***** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.7326 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:11.11.2010 Radhey Sham and others ...Petitioners Versus Usha Rani and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. H.K.Brinda, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 16.09.2010 passed by learned Trial Court by which an application filed by the defendants for dismissal of the suit on the ground that the plaintiff Usha Rani does not want to contest the same, has been dismissed. In brief, Usha Rani filed the present suit, through her General Power of Attorney Rajesh Kumar, for partition by way of separation of her share in the land bearing Khewat/Khatauni No.104/128, Khasra Nos.8//23/2(5-3) situated in village Rupnagar, Hadbast No.44, Tehsil and District Ropar by way of demolishing the constructed structure. It is alleged that Usha Rani is not appearing before the Court as she has allegedly renounced the world and has become a monk. The defendants filed the application, in which they have alleged that Usha Rani has told them that she has withdrawn her General Power of Attorney and has written a letter to the Court that she does not want to proceed with the suit and the same may be dismissed. On the other hand, reply to the application was filed by her attorney, in which it was alleged that the suit is fixed for evidence of the defendants for the last many dates, in which the defendants are seeking adjournments one after the other. It was alleged that Usha Rani has not withdrawn her General Power of Attorney. C.R. No.7326 of 2010 (O&M) -2- ***** After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Trial Court has found that a registered General Power of Attorney was executed by Usha Rani in favour of Rajesh Kumar which has not been revoked so far. The letter which has been much talked about is not proved to have been written by Usha Rani because it can only be proved when she comes to the Court and makes a statement or her General Power of Attorney makes a statement in this regard. Otherwise, it could be a handiwork of the defendants also for the purpose of getting the suit dismissed. Thus, in my view, until and unless Usha Rani herself appears before the Court and is identified by her Advocate and General Power of Attorney and she makes a statement for withdrawal of the suit or the statement is made by her General Power of Attorney for withdrawal of the suit, the suit cannot be dismissed on a mere letter produced on record by the defendants. In view thereof, I do not find any merit in the present revision petition and as such, the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. November 11, 2010 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE