The irregularity in signing the plaint and verification was remediable and did not warrant the dismissal of the suit.

1. An order dated 25.05.2009 passed by learned Munsif, Birpur at Supaul in Title Suit No. 20 of 2000, holding the said suit not to be maintainable on the ground that it was incompetent from its very inception, inasmuch as the suit was filed by a person who was not duly authorized by the plaintiff; is impugned in the present application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. I have heard Mr. Shashi Shekhar Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Dronacharya learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents at length.

3. The facts relevant for adjudication of the present application which are not in dispute are as under:-

4. The Title Suit No. 20 of 2000 was filed in the name of the petitioner in the Court of learned Munsif Birpur, Supaul, through one Raj Kumar Das claiming to be holder of Power of Attorney given by the petitioner. In the suit, the plaintiff sought for a decree for specific performance of contract of sale on the basis of an agreement to this effect dated 15.11.1999. The said suit was admitted. Issues were framed and the evidence started. At that stage, the respondents, who are defendants before the Court below, filed an application in said Title Suit No. 20 of 2000, contending that the suit was unauthorised and was not maintainable as Power of Attorney had not been filed alongwith the plaint.

5. This is not in dispute that by an order dated 02.03.2005 passed by the Court below, the petitioner was allowed to make his signature on the plaint.

6. The application dated 22.02.2005 was finally heard. In course of hearing it was contended by the petitioner before the Court below that Power of Attorney had been executed by the petitioner in favour of Raj Kumar Das, his brother, to look after his property as well as to look after the litigation. The petitioner took a plea that plaint had been signed by said Raj Kumar Das under his authority and instruction and that even if, it was assumed to be an irregularity, the same stood rectified after the petitioner had put his signature on the plaint under the orders of the Court. The Court below however, allowed the said application dated 22.02.2005 by the impugned order on the sole ground that at the time of filing of suit, no Power of Attorney was filed and, therefore, the suit itself was incompetent from its very inception.

7. Mr. S.S. Dwivedi, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner while assailing the impugned order has submitted that Order VI Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) requires that every pleading shall be signed by the party and his pleader (if any), and in an event where a party is unable to sign pleading by reason of absence or for other good cause, it may be signed by any person duly authorised by him to sign such pleading. He submits that though Power of Attorney could not be filed at the time of filing of the suit but the same was subsequently brought on record before the Court below. In any event, he submits, that after the petitioner put his signature on the plaint under the orders of the Court, irregularity if any, stood rectified. He further submits that the requirement of putting signature on the plaint by a party under Order VI Rule 15 is merely procedural in nature and the Court below ought not to have dismissed the suit itself on such ground, particularly as such defect was subsequently removed by the petitioner by putting his own signature on the plaint. He has placed reliance upon a judgment of this Court reported in A.I.R. 1928 Patna 51 (Johnston and others V. Rameshwar Singh Bahadur) as well as A.I.R. 1925 Lahore 144 (Ali Ahmad V. Abdul Ghani and others).

8. Mr. Dwivedi has submitted that the petitioner was serving in Indian Army and as such he had authorized his brother Raj Kumar Das by way of a Power of Attorney which is Annexure-1 to the present application and Title Suit No. 20 of 2000 was filed by him through said