#power of attorney holder

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a party’s affidavit remains admissible as evidence even after their Power of Attorney holder has testified, as no statutory bar exists under evidence law. This ensures the principal retains the right to testify in their own cause, reinforcing the flexibility of witness competency in civil proceedings.

Kerala High Court upholds conviction under Section 138 NI Act, ruling that a power of attorney holder with direct knowledge of the transaction can validly testify. The court also clarified that mere endorsement of a cheque to a third party does not negate the original payee's rights, reinforcing the complainant's locus standi in cheque dishonour cases.

Bombay High Court rules that Order XVIII Rule 3A of the CPC is directory, not mandatory, allowing a party to submit affidavit evidence in their personal capacity even after their power of attorney holder has testified, provided the court's implied permission exists. This holding clarifies procedural flexibility in civil evidence, impacting litigants and practitioners in contract and business disputes.