IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1912 of 2010(R) ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA.2469/2009 IN OP.727/2007 of FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.KUTTAN PILLAI, ROHINI NIVAS, KARUVATTA VILLAGE, VADAKKUMMURI, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REP. BY HIS P/A.HOLDER BHAVANI AMMA, W/O.KUTTAN PILLAI, ROHINI NIVAS, DO. VILLAGE, VADAKKUMMURI, DO. DISTRICT, (ORIGINAL P/A. ALREADY FILED IN THE FAMILY COURT,ALAPPUZHA). BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ARUN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): CR.PETITIONER ---------------------------- LATHA KUMARI S., D/O.GOPINATHAN NAIR, VADAKKEDATHIL VEETTIL, PILAPPUZHA MURI, HARIPPAD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.1912 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. Petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order. Petitioner is the petitioner in O.P.No.727/2007 on the file of Family Court, Alappuzha. Respondent is his wife. Petitioner is represented by his power of attorney holder who is stated to be his own mother. Ext.P5 is an order passed by the Family Court, Alappuzha. As the husband who is the petitioner in the O.P. is abroad , he was allowed to be represented by his mother. In the impugned order, it is stated that attorney will not be entitled to depose on behalf of the petitioner in personal matters. It is however specifically stated that power of attorney can depose only as a witness and this order will not bar the attorney in representing the petitioner and filing proof affidavit in matters other than personal. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this order should not stand in the way of the power of attorney giving evidence in respect of which she WPC.No.1912/10 2 has personal knowledge. The purport of the impugned order essentially is that the power of attorney cannot give evidence in respect of matters which are within the personal knowledge of the husband, the petitioner. In such circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Writ petition is dismissed. K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. WPC.No.1912/10 2