To decide on the matter, the High Court examined Section 120 of the Indian Evidence Act, which states, “In all civil proceedings, the parties to the suit, and the husband or wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent witnesses … ”
The High Court observed that this provision overrides the general procedural rules, and allows non-litigating spouses to testify in place of their litigating spouses, even without needing to execute a power of attorney.
The High Court, therefore, disagreed with the trial court’s finding on this aspect and set aside the order rejecting the plaintiff’s request to have her husband testify on her behalf.
“The finding of the trial court in the impugned order that the husband cannot give evidence on behalf of the plaintiff/wife and that he can only be cited and examined as the plaintiff’s witness cannot be justified. The trial court passed the impugned order without adverting to Section 120 of the Indian Evidence Act. Accordingly, it is set aside,” the High Court ruled.
Source: Barandbench
