IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-01-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR CRP No. 6248 and 6253 of 2025 and CMP.Nos.30907 and 30947 of 2025 Yashwin Krishnakanth.S Petitioner in both CRP’s.

Vs Sridevi R Respondent in both CRP’s PRAYER in CRP.No.6248 of 2025:Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India praying to direct the learned Principal Family Court, Chennai to take on file and number the I.A.S.R.Nos.13994 of 2025 and 13996 of 2025 in HMOP.No. 323 of 2024 on the file of Learned Principal Family Court, Chennai in accordance with law ( Amended vide court order dated19/12/2025 made in CMP No.32389 of 2025 in CRP No.6248 of 2025)

PRAYER in CRP.No.6253 of 2025:Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India praying to direct the learned Principal Family Court, Chennai to take on file and number the I.A.S.R.Nos.13987 of 2025 and 13988 of 2025 in HMOP.No. 4483 of 2024 on the file of learned Principal Family Court, Chennai in accordance with law In both CRP’s:-

For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.M.Venkatakrishnan for M/s.Apex Law Office For Respondent(s): Mr.K.V.Muthuvisakan

COMMON ORDER

These Civil Revision Petitions are filed seeking a direction to Principal Family Court, Chennai to number the applications filed by the petitioner represented by his power agent in IASr.Nos. 13994, 13996 , 13987 and 13988 of 2025.

2. It is stated by the petitioner that the application filed by the petitioner duly represented by his power agent has been returned by the family court as petitioner unable to appear in person before the concerned court.

3. This Court called for xerox copies of the records in IASr.Nos. 13994, 13996 , 13987 and 13988 of 2025. A perusal of the same would indicate that the petition filed by the petitioner has been returned by the Family Court on 07-11-

2025 raising certain objections.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the Family Court refuses to hand over the returned papers to the power agent of the petitioner, he is unable to comply with the condition.

5. This Court, in CRP(PD).Nos. 4073 and 4227 of 2024, issued certain guidelines for numbering of the petitions presented through duly authorised power agent of the petitioner.

“61.In an attempt to supplement the safeguards laid down in the Shrilakshmi case and to further ensure the bona fides of a power of attorney, the following guidelines are framed by this Court:

(i)To ensure the authenticity of deed of power of attorney, in case, if executed in India, it should be registered within the jurisdictional Sub Registrar or should be executed in the presence of a notary public.

(ii)In case the power of attorney is executed abroad and sent to India, it should be adjudicated by the competent authority or it should be notarized by the notary public or a similar officer appointed by that country to attest the document. It must be accompanied by a certificate of notary public confirming that the party is residing within the jurisdiction for which he has been authorized. Further, it should also be adjudicated in terms of Section 3(c) of the Stamp Act read with Article 48 of the I Schedule attached to the Stamp Act.

(iii)The power agent can represent the party at every stage of the proceeding right from the stage of presentation of the plaint/petition. However, the power agent cannot substitute the presence of the party during mediation and recording of evidence or when the presence of the party is felt indispensable.

(iv)The plaint/petition can be presented by the petitioner appearing in person before the Family Court or by a duly authorized power agent. At the time of presentation of the plaint/petition by a power agent, it should be accompanied by a petition under Order III Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the registered and adjudicated power of attorney, and two affidavits, one executed by the Principal stating that he/she has appointed a power of attorney, and the other executed b