Skip to playerSkip to main content
Important landmark judgement pertaining to Power of Attorney by the honourable Supreme Court is going to be beneficial to many, especially the NRIs. Watch the key points highlighted in the video for clarity.

Visit website: https://www.nrilegalservices.com
Latest Blogs: https://www.nrilegalservices.com/blog/
Email: query@nrilegalservices.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NRILegalServices
Telegram: https://t.me/nrilegalservices
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/nrilegalservices/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/NRILegal
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/nrilegalservices

#PowerofAttorney #LandmarkJudgement #India #SupremeCourt #POA #Section18 #RegistrationAct #RevocationofPowerofAttorney #RevocationProcess #SellingProperty #SaleDeed #PropertyDisputes #NRIs #PropertyOwners #NRILegalServices #LawFirm

Category

📚
Learning
Transcript
00:00Hello everyone, this is advocate Alisha Munga, legal associate at NRI Legal Services.
00:05Today in this video, I will discuss a recent judgment passed by the Supreme Court of India
00:11titled as Amarnath v. Gyanchan.
00:14This judgment highlights that the production of the original power of attorney is not necessary
00:19if the document is presented for registration by the attorney holder who executed the document
00:25on the strength of it.
00:27To know more about the case synopsis, please watch the video till the end.
00:32The subject matter involved in this case is that an appeal was filed in the Supreme Court
00:37of India against the Order of the High Court of Himacharya Pradesh which held that the production
00:43of the original power of attorney was necessary for the execution of the sale deed under section
00:4818 of the Registration Act 1908.
00:52Now, I will give you an overview of the facts of the case.
00:56The plaintiff entered into an oral agreement with the buyer for the sale of his property
01:02for a consideration of Rs. 55,000.
01:05Thereafter, he executed a power of attorney in the favour of the attorney holder who is
01:10the second defendant in this matter.
01:12When the buyer failed to make arrangement of the money for the execution of the sale deed,
01:18the plaintiff cancelled the sale agreement and thereafter, the attorney holder surrendered
01:24the original power of attorney to the plaintiff.
01:27However, the attorney holder applied a copy of the power of attorney and fraudulently in
01:34connivance with the defendant entered into the sale agreement for Rs. 30,000.
01:38The plaintiff contended that as the power of attorney stood cancelled, such a sale agreement
01:45should be declared as null and void.
01:48The plaintiff further filed a case of declaration by the way of permanent injunction that he is
01:54owner in possession of the sued property.
01:57The High Court held that as the original power of attorney stood cancelled, the attorney holder
02:02was not competent to enter into the sale agreement with the buyer.
02:06The High Court further decided the matter in favour of the plaintiff and declared the imitation
02:12done as null and void.
02:14After the judgment of the High Court, the stance taken by the counsel of the buyer was that
02:20a registered power of attorney should have been only cancelled or terminated by following
02:25a due procedure of the law.
02:27He further laid stress on Section 32A of the Registration Act to state that under the power
02:33of attorney given by the plaintiff, the second defendant was well within his right to execute
02:38the sale deed.
02:39On the other hand side, the counsel of the plaintiff laid stress upon Section 33 Subclause 4 of the
02:46Registration Act which contemplates that the production of the original power of attorney
02:51was necessary for the execution of the sale deed.
02:54The counsel for the plaintiff also stated that the entire process of making an application
03:00to procure the copy of the power of attorney, its preparation, the receipts clearly shows
03:05fraud and collusion between the defendants, the sub-registrar and other officials of the
03:12registering authority.
03:14After the judgment of the High Court, two issues were raised for the consideration of the Supreme Court.
03:20Firstly, whether the production of the original power of attorney before the registering authority
03:25was necessary for the execution of the sale and secondly, whether the attorney holders surrendered
03:32the original power of attorney.
03:34Both these issues have been discussed in the judgment given by the Supreme Court.
03:39I will now discuss the judgment of the Supreme Court along with the final decision arrived
03:44at by the Court.
03:45The Apex Court firstly noted the point that the state Himachal Pradesh where the case initially
03:52arises, the government by making an amendment to the Registration Act inserted a Section 18A
03:59which contemplates the production of the original copy of the document which is sought to be registered.
04:07Please note, in the present case, it was the sale deed that was sought to be registered and
04:12not the power of attorney.
04:14Hence, the High Court erred in its decision that the production of the original power of
04:19attorney was necessary for the execution of the sale deed.
04:23Further, the Supreme Court in line with the provisions of the Registration Act rejected the
04:30contention of the plaintiff that the production of original power of attorney was very necessary
04:35for the execution of the sale deed.
04:37Now, deciding the second issue, the Supreme Court referred to a letter which was sent by
04:44the plaintiff to the attorney holder in which he is instructing the attorney holder to have
04:50in with the sale process as he in the dire need of money.
04:54In this letter, there is no mention of cancellation of POA or its surrender.
05:00The Supreme Court, referring to the contents of the letter, said that merely writing the
05:07word cancelled on the original power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void.
05:12The Supreme Court thus set aside the judgment of the High Court.
05:17In concluding the judgment, the Supreme Court said that the production of the document which
05:23is sought to be registered is necessary for production before the registering authority.
05:29The intention of this judgment is in line with Section 18A of the Registration Act which
05:35is to save the common people from unnecessary paperwork in the property matters.
05:40Thus, considering this judgment, I would advise my NRI friends who have executed power of attorney
05:47in the favour of their friends or relatives for the look after their property or other
05:51things to follow a proper procedure of revocation.
05:55Please understand that by simply tearing the original power of attorney, merely writing the
06:00word cancel, striking of the power of attorney or taking the original back from the attorney
06:06holder will not meet the requirements of the revocation process.
06:10For your convenience, I will briefly describe the steps involved in the revocation process.
06:16Firstly, a proper revocation deed needs to be made of the power of attorney and the same
06:21needs to be registered with the concerned authorities.
06:24Secondly, a legal notice should be sent to the attorney holder along with the registered
06:30cancellation deed.
06:32In addition to these two steps, a publication can be done in the local newspaper in the area
06:38where the attorney holder results.
06:41I hope the information provided in today's video was helpful.
06:45If you have any queries related to this topic or any other legal topic, you can write us an
06:51email on query at the rate nrilegalservices.com.
06:55Please do like, comment and share this video.
06:58Also, if you want to watch more such informative videos, subscribe our channel.
Comments

Recommended