JAGAT NARAYAN, J.—These two revision applications can conveniently be disposed of by one judgment as the same question of law arises in them. That question in whether a recognised agent of a party can cross-examine a witness of the opposite party.

2. In both the cases a hand-writing expert was examined on behalf of one party and the permission of the court was sought for his cross-examination by another hand-writing expert on behalf of the other party holding a power of attorney. The permission was refused by the Senior Civil Judge, Jaipur City, in one case (Civil Revision No. 521/1964), but was granted by the District Judge, Jaipur City, in. the other case (Civil Revision No. 18 of 1965).

3. Order 3, Rule 1 C.P.C. lays down that 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 his recognised agent or by a pleader appearing, applying or acting, as the case may be, on his behalf. Persons holding powers of attorney authorising them to make and do such appearance, applications and acts on behalf of a party are included in the term "recognised agents" under order 3, rule 2 C. P. C. Order 3, rule 4 runs as follows:—

"Appointment of pleader —(1) No pleader shall act for any person in any Court, unless he has been appointed for the purpose by such person by a document in writing signed by such person or by his recognised agent or by some other person duly authorised by or under a power-of-attorney to make such appointment.

(2) Every such apppintment shall be filed in Court and shall be deemed to be in force until determined with the leave of the Court by a writing signed by the client or the pleader, as the case may be, and filed in-Court, or until the client or the pleader dies, or until all proceedings in the suit are ended so far as regards the client.

(3) For the purposes of sub-rule (2) an application for review of judgment, an application under sec. 144 or sec. 152 of this Code, any appeal from any decree or order in the suit and any application or act for the purpose of obtaining copies of documents or return of documents produced or filed in the suit or of obtaining refund of monies paid into the court in connection with the suit shall be deemed to be proceedings in the suit.

(4) The High Court may, by general, order, direct that where the person by whom a pleader is appointed is unable to write his name, his mark upon the document appointing the pleader shall be attested by such person and in such manner as may be specified by the order.

(5) No pleader who has been engaged for the purpose of pleading only shall plead on behalf of any party, unless, he has filed in Court a memorandum of appearance signed by himself and stating—

(a) the names of the parties to the suit,

(b) the name of the party for whom he appears, and

(c) the name of the person by whom he is authorised to appear :

Provided that nothing in this sub-rule shall apply to any pleader engaged to plead on behalf of any party by any other pleader who has been duly appointed to act in court on behalf of such party."

4. A perusal of the above provisions of the Code goes to show that a recognised agent of a party can cross-examine a witness of the opposite party, if this amounts to "acting". If on the other hand it amounts to "pleading" then only the party himself or his pleader can do so. There is conflict of judicial opinion on the point.

5. The earliest reported case is that of Thunnudeo Raghvi Vs. Baldeo Raghvi (1) in which Clarke, J. of the Nagpur High Court held that examining a witness or cross-examining witness a does not fall under the category of pleading", but falls in the category of "acting".

6. The next case is the decision of Teja Singh, J. in G.G. in Council vs. Bhagwan Sahai (2) in which the same view was taken. The learned Judge observed in para 9—

"What the recognised agent merely w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document