The Role of a Power of Attorney Holder in Family Court Proceedings

An individual involved in a Family Court matter may authorise another person to act as their agent through a Power of Attorney (POA). This instrument empowers the designated agent, or ‘holder’, to represent the principal’s interests and perform specified acts. The legal framework governing this representation is robust, though subject to certain judicial safeguards and inherent limitations, particularly within the sensitive context of family law.

Statutory Framework for Representation

The admissibility of a Power of Attorney holder in Family Court is not explicitly prohibited by the Family Courts Act, 1984, or the rules framed thereunder by the High Court of Kerala or the Government of Kerala. Instead, their role is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), which regulates the proceedings of all courts of civil jurisdiction.

Several key provisions establish this foundation:

• Section 21 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) stipulates that all proceedings under the Act shall be regulated, as far as may be, by the CPC.
• Section 141 of the CPC extends the procedures applicable to suits to all proceedings in any court of civil jurisdiction. Consequently, Family Courts are bound to follow the CPC and possess the powers of a Civil Court.
• Order III, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC expressly permit the appearance, application, or act in any court to be made or done by the party in person, by their recognised agent, or by a pleader. A Power of Attorney holder is recognised as such an agent.
• Order VI, Rule 14 of the CPC, concerning the signing and verification of pleadings, further accommodates representation by an authorised agent.
• Rules 22 and 23 of the Kerala Civil Rules of Practice, 1971, provide additional procedural guidelines for such representation within the state.

The relationship between the principal (the donor of the power) and the agent (the donee) is fundamentally one of agency, as defined under Section 182 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The agent is authorised to act on behalf of the principal and consents to do so, binding the principal by their actions within the scope of the granted authority.

Scope of Authority and Permissible Functions

A duly authorised Power of Attorney holder may undertake a wide range of actions on behalf of the principal in a Family Court proceeding. These functions include:

• Filing Pleadings: Presenting petitions, including a divorce petition, which must be signed by the principal but can be verified by the agent.
• Court Appearances: Attending hearings, responding to summonses, and making representations before the court.
• Mediation and Negotiation: Participating in alternative dispute resolution processes, including mediation sessions and settlement negotiations.
• Financial Management: Managing the principal’s assets and finances that are relevant to the case, provided such authority is specified in the POA document.
• Appeals: Filing an appeal against an adverse judgment or order on behalf of the principal.

Inherent Limitations and Prohibitions

Despite the broad scope of authority, the role of a Power of Attorney holder is not absolute. Certain actions remain the exclusive preserve of the principal.

Testimony and Personal Knowledge

A Power of Attorney holder is a competent witness and may depose in court regarding facts that are within their personal knowledge. However, they cannot give evidence on behalf of the principal concerning matters of which only the principal could have personal knowledge. Such matters often form the crux of family disputes and require the principal to be available for cross-examination.

Consent and Compromise

The agent cannot unilaterally compromise or settle a case. Any final settlement or agreement requires the express consent and instruction of the principal. The court may require this consent to be affirmed directly by the principal, either in person or through video conferencing, to ensure it is genuine and voluntary.

Fiduciary Duty

The holder operates under a strict fiduciary duty to act in good faith, with loyalty, and solely in the best interests of the principal. Any action taken must be strictly within the boundaries of the authority conferred by the Power of Attorney instrument.

Special Considerations in Mutual Consent Divorce (Section 13B, HMA)

Proceedings for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the HMA require the court to be satisfied that the consent of the parties is free and voluntary.

While a petition under this section may be presented through a Power of Attorney holder, the court retains ultimate discretion to insist on the personal appearance of the parties. To ascertain genuine consent, the court may conduct its enquiry directly with the parties. In cases where physical presence is impracticable, modern technology offers a viable alternative.

The Supreme Court of India has affirmed the use of video conferencing for recording evidence, in State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai [(2003) 4 SCC 601].

The Supreme Court judgement in Santhini v. Vijaya Venketesh [AIR 2017 SC 5745] has permitted use of video conferencing in Family Court proceedings where both parties consent but it is only after the efforts of reconciliation and settlement fails, the videoconferencing can be resorted on the joint application filed by the parties or the memorandum of consent by both the parties, husband and wife, for such videoconferencing, in the discretion of the Court, if the Court considers it appropriate.

Therefore, a Family Court may interact with the parties via video conference to satisfy itself of their mutual consent. If, during such an interaction, the court deems a physical appearance necessary, it is empowered to direct the parties to appear in person.

Conclusion

A Power of Attorney is a valuable legal instrument that facilitates representation in Family Court, particularly when a party is unable to be physically present. The holder can manage procedural and administrative aspects of a case, but cannot replace the principal in matters requiring personal testimony or the affirmation of consent. The judiciary retains the discretionary power to demand the personal appearance of the parties at any stage to ensure that the ends of justice are met.

It is therefore imperative that the Power of Attorney document be drafted with precision, clearly delineating the scope and limitations of the agent’s authority.

Post Views: 22