THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO C.R.P.No.4046 of 2007 ORDER: Aggrieved by the order of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Anakapalle, in I.A.No.434 of 2007 in O.S.No.404 of 2001, dated 13-08-2007, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed. 2. The petitioner herein is the 1st defendant in O.S.No.404 of 2001 and 1st respondent in I.A.No.434 of 2007. The respondents 1 and 2 herein are the plaintiﬀs in O.S.No.404 of 2001 and they ﬁled I.A.No.434 of 2007, under Rule 32 C.R.P. and Section 151 C.P.C. requesting the Court to accept Power of Attorney and permit the power of attorney holder to appear and act on behalf of the plaintiﬀs. After due enquiry, the trial Court allowed the said petition. Being aggrieved, the 1st defendant ﬁled the present revision petition on the ground that the order of the trial Court is not sustainable and erroneous. 3. Now the point for consideration is whether in the particular case on hand, the power of attorney holder is permitted to appear and act on behalf of the plaintiff. 4. As per the impugned order, it is an admitted fact that power of attorney was permitted to file the suit on behalf of the plaintiﬀs. The suit was ﬁled in the year 2001 and present I.A. is ﬁled in the year 2007. Nowhere the petitioners herein have taken the plea that the suit is not maintainable in view of the ﬁling of the suit on behalf of the power of attorney. The said objection was not raised at the initial stage i.e. registering the suit, more over when the Court permitted power of attorney to ﬁle the suit on behalf of the plaintiﬀs. The plea now raised by the petitioners herein cannot be appreciated by any stretch of imagination more over as per the provisions under Rule 32 C.R.P., it is crystal clear that the permission should be obtained from the Court in a case where any agent other than an advocate appears on behalf of the party. Admittedly, in the present case on hand, the Court entertained the suit ﬁled by the GPA holder. Further more, the advocate is also being appeared for the plaintiffs. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, no permission is necessary under Rule 32 C.R.P. in the present case. 6. Therefore, I see no ground to defer the ﬁnding of the trial Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________ K.S.APPA RAO,J Date: 03rd December, 2011 kvr