1. Defendant in O.S.528 of 2005 on the file of Additional Munsiff Court, Palakkad is the appellant. Plaintiffs are the respondents. The suit was filed by the respondents through their power of attorney holder for realization of the advance of Rs.40,000/- paid under Ext.A1 agreement for sale. The appellant resisted the suit contending that though first respondent authorized the power of attorney holder to institute the suit, as admitted in the plaint, second respondent has only orally authorized the person to institute the suit and without a written authority, the suit could not be instituted and therefore the suit is not maintained. Appellant also contended that though he executed Ext.A1 agreement for sale and received Rs.40,000/-as advance, he is not liable to repay the advance amount as he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement and sale deed was not executed due to the failure of the respondents to perform their part of the contact.

2. Learned Munsiff on the evidence found that first, respondent has authorized the power of attorney holder to institute the suit by Ext.A3 power of attorney and though second respondent has only orally authorized th