C.R. 6292 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAN AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. 6292 of 2008 Date of decision: 21.10.2009 Sukhdev Singh petitioner vs Meena Kumari and another Respondent Present: Mr. VK Shukla, Advocate 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.S.BEDI,J. The defendant has preferred this revision petition against order dated 30.10.2008 declining permission to the defendant- petitioner to produce in evidence the registered power of attorney dated 4.2.2000, certified copy of which stands marked as DX/D. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice that on the basis of the power of attorney of defendant- petitioner, the attorney i.e. Amarjit Singh had signed the written statement and verified the same and had also appeared as a witness as attorney. The trial court seems to have ignored the provisions of Section 85 of the India Evidence Act, which reads as follows:- “Presumption as to powers-of-attorney:-- The Court shall presume that every document purporting to be a power-of- attorney, and to have been executed before, and authenticated by, a Notary Public, or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, [Indian] Consul or vice-Consul, or representative of the [ Central Government], was so executed and authenticated.” C.R. 6292 of 2008 -2- The trial court seems to have relied upon the provisions of Order 13 Rule 4 CPC, which deals with the notice to admit facts, to dismiss the application. The trial court has declined to exhibit the documents, despite the fact that original having been produced, on the ground that the attorney could not produce the original during cross-examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the same power of attorney was required to produce before the other authorities, as such the same could not be produced at the time of cross-examination. In view of the above circumstances, I am of the opinion that order dated 30.10.2008 is liable to be set aside. The revision petition is allowed, order dated 30.10.2008 declining to exhibit the power of attorney dated 4.2.2000 is hereby set aside and a direction is given to the trial court that in case the original power of attorney is brought to the notice of the court by the attorney, the trial court will exhibit the document, which has been marked as DX/D. October 21 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE