IMPORTANT POINTS
The court has discretionary power to grant permission to a private person, who is not an advocate, to argue the case for on behalf of another, in a particular case, as envisaged under Section 32 of the Act, 1961, the said power has to be exercised carefully and vigilantly on full satisfaction of his capability and the assistance that the court may get from him. A person, other than an advocate, cannot claim right to plead as of right for another, before the court.

JUDGMENT :

HARILAL, J

Whether the power of attorney holder has the right to argue the case for on behalf of the Principal, as of right, under the power of attorney before the court? This is the question that emerges for consideration in this original petition.

2. The petitioner herein is the petitioner in O.P.No.509/2018 on the files of the Family Court, Thalassery. The aforesaid original petition was filed seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. He has filed I.A.No.250/2019 seeking permission to argue his case by his power of attorney holder. According to the petitioner, he has not appointed a lawyer in this case because of his previous experience with his lawyer. So he prayed for permitting his power of attorney holder to appear and argue the case on behalf of him.

3. The respondent filed counter contending that none other than a lawyer or a party-in-person has the right to argue a case before the court. The intention of the petitioner is only to protract the proceedings and to unnecessarily harass the respondent.

4. After considering the aforesaid rival pleas, the court below dismissed the said application on a finding that though a party can appoint an agent or a power of attorney holder to appear on behalf of him in a court, the agent or the power of attorney holder cannot be permitted to argue the case before the court, on behalf of the principal. The legality and correctness of the aforesaid findings are challenged in this original petition.

5. Heard Smt.K.V.Bhadra Kumari, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Ramesh P., the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

6. We find that the aforesaid question in controversy centers around Order 3 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Sections 29, 30, 32 and 33 of the Advocates Act, 1961. So, it is necessary to refer and analyse the aforesaid provisions as stated in the Act.

7. Order 3 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC Reads thus:

1. Appearances, etc., may be in person, by recognized agent or by pleader.-Any appearance, application or act in or to any court, required or authorised by law to be made or done by a party in such Court, may except where otherwise expressly provided by any law for the time being in force, be made or done by the party in person, or by his recognised agent, or by a pleader 1[appearing, applying or acting, as the case may be,] on his behalf: provided that any such appearance shall, if the Court so directs, be made by the party in person.

2. Recognized agents.-The recognized agents of parties by whom such appearances, applications and acts may be made or done are-

(a) persons holding powers of attorney, authorizing them to make and do such appearances, applications and acts on behalf of such parties;

(b) persons carrying on trade or business for and in the names of parties not resident within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the court within which limits the appearance, application or act is made or done, in matters connected with such trade or business only, where no other agent is expressly authorised to make and do such appearances, applications and acts. [Emphasis supplied]

8. According to Order 3 Rule 1 of the CPC, any appearance, application or act in or to any court, required or authorised by law to be made by a party in person is allowed to be done by his recognized agent also except where otherwise expressly provided by any law, for the time being in force. As per Order 3 Rule 2 of CPC, the power of attorney holder is a recognized agent of the principal, who authorised him. So, the power of attorney holder is permitted to act, on behalf of the Principal, except where otherwise expressly provided by any law, for the time being in force.

9. Firstly, let us analyse the aforesaid provision. What does the expression “appearance, application or act” in Order 3 Rule 1 mean and include. What is stated is right to appear, make application or act only in court. It is significant to note that the word 'plead' has not been