HC ruling on Power of Attorney

Chennai, Aug 30 (UNI) Madras High Court today said a complaint, even if not signed by the Power of Attorney (POA) on behalf of the complainant, but signed in his own name, was maintainable and not bad in law in cheque bounce cases.

A Division Bench comprising Justices P Sathasivam and Justice S Manikumar made the observation and remanded back to a Single Judge to decide on merit a petition filed by one K Gopalakrishnan.

The petitioner issued a cheque to one Karunakaran represented by power of attorney holder Dhandapani in July 2004. It was dishonoured.

Karunakaran, through his Power of Attorney (POA) filed a complaint against the petitioner for an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (NIA). The petitioner sought to quash the proceedings pending before Judicial Magistrate-II, Chidambaram and Mr Justice M Jeyapaul referred the matter to a Division Bench.

The bench said the complaint, even if not signed by the POA on behalf of the complainant but signed in his own name was maintainable and not bad in law, because it was more procedural than substantive. Though the POA had initially failed to produce the deed of POA or an affidavit of the complainant in proof of execution of the POA, it could be rectified by producing it at a subsequent stage of the proceedings as and when the validity of the POA was questioned by the accused and the court could then be called upon to decide the genuineness or validity of the POA.

It was not required to record the sworn affidavit of the complainant on a later date either to enable the court to exercise its discretion, the bench added.

UNI XR AA YA PM1955