{"id":262546,"date":"2022-02-26T10:30:39","date_gmt":"2022-02-26T05:00:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=262546"},"modified":"2022-03-04T08:45:00","modified_gmt":"2022-03-04T03:15:00","slug":"merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Merely writing “cancelled” on registered power of attorney wouldn’t make it null and void: Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court:<\/strong> The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph*<\/strong> and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ., held that mere writing the word “cancelled” or drawing a line would not render Power of Attorney null and void as there must be cancellation and it must further be brought to the notice of the third party at any rate.<\/p>\n

Point of Discord <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The plaintiff had entered into an oral agreement with the defendant 1 for Rs. 55000 for sale of property. Pursuant to which the plaintiff executed special Power of Attorney (POA) on 28-01-1997 in favour of defendant 2 for selling property for amount Rs. 55000. It was the case of the plaintiff that since the defendant 1 could not arrange money, the original POA was surrendered to him (plaintiff) on 02-02-1987 and it was cancelled on the same day.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff alleged that defendant 2 applied for the copy of the power of attorney, and fraudulently executed the sale deed on 28-04-1987 for Rs. 30,000 without authority since POA was deemed to have been cancelled in the eye of law on being handed over him (plaintiff). Therefore, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration by way of permanent injunction that he was the owner in possession of the property and the mutation showing the sale in favour of the defendant 1 was null and void.<\/p>\n

Whereas, the defendant 2 contended that he never surrendered the original power of attorney prior to execution of sale and the sale was valid. Further, the defendant contended that the plaintiff received Rs.10,000 as part price and the remaining Rs.20,000 was paid at the time of registration.<\/p>\n

Concurrent Findings of the Courts Below<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The Trial Court did not accept the plaintiff\u2019s case that the second defendant was not his power of attorney at the time of the sale. The Court held that cancellation also required registration and mere writing of a word \u2018cancelled\u2019 on the original power of attorney did not mean that the power of attorney had been cancelled, till notice was given to the second defendant. On the issue that the sale was not affected through original copy of POA, the Court held that as per Section 18A of the Registration Act, 1908, sale deed should accompany true copy of the power of attorney and the original was not required.<\/p>\n

Relying on the rule that the agent could not act against the interest of the principal, the Trial Court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to the rendition of the account from the defendant 2 and directed the defendant 2 to pay Rs.55000. The Findings of the Trial Court were affirmed by the First Appellate Court.<\/p>\n

Impugned Decision of the High Court<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The High Court opined that POA being cancelled on 02-02-1987, defendant 2 was not competent to execute the sale deed on 28-04-1987. Further, relying on Section 18 of the Registration Act, the High Court held that it was necessary for the Registering Authority to see the true copy of the special POA since in view of the cancellation of the original power of attorney, the same could not be relied upon by the Registering Authority for the purpose of execution of the sale deed. Hence, the High Court set aside the findings of the courts below and decreed the suit by declaring the plaintiff as the owner in possession of the land and the mutation showing the sale in favour of the First Defendantwas declared null and void.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Findings <\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n

The Court analysed Section 18 of the Registration Act and concluded that the production of the certified copy of the power of attorney along with the original of the sale deed was fully justified as the section did not require production of original copy. Therefore, the claim of plaintiff that non-production of original PoA was fatal to valid registration was summarily rejected and the understanding of Section 18A by previous court was held erroneous. The Bench opined that the inquiry contemplated under the Registration Act, could not extend to question as to whether the person who executed the document in his capacity of the power of attorney was indeed having a valid power of attorney or not to execute the document or not as the document which was sought to be registered was sale deed and not the POA in question.<\/p>\n

The Bench noticed that there was an agreement to sell in favour of the first defendant, the property was agreed to be sold for Rs.55,000 and the power of attorney was undoubtedly, registered. Further, on 02-06-1987, the plaintiff wrote to defendant 2 about proposed sale and the POA which showed his claim that the POA stood cancelled four months early on 02-02-1987. The Bench observed that the plaintiff admitted of not getting the POA cancelled at the Sub-Registrar Office, and even admitted not having sent any notice of cancellation neither to defendant 2 nor to defendant 1.<\/p>\n

Hence, the Bench concluded that the High Court was not justified in disturbing the concurrent findings of courts below in a Second Appeal. The Bench held that for cancellation of a registered POA there must be cancellation and it must further be brought to the notice of the third party at any rate. Additionally, noticing that there was no expressed restriction on price in the POA, the Bench held that at best the defendant 2 could be held guilty of breach of duty to for acting against the interest of principal however, defendant 2 having sold the property for Rs.30,000 instead Rs.55,000 could not invalidate the sale or render it null and void. Accordingly, the impugned judgment was set aside.<\/p>\n

[Amar Nath v. Gian Chand, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 102<\/b><\/a>, decided on 28-01-2022]<\/p>\n

\n

Appearance by<\/strong><\/p>\n

For the Plaintiff: Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Advocate<\/p>\n

For Defendants: Ashutosh Dubey, Gurmeet Singh Makker and Arpana Bhatt, Advocates<\/p>\n

\n

Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has put this report together<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph* and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ., held that mere writing the word “cancelled” or drawing <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":262561,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[30327,32659,3590,10871,30457,30459],"class_list":["post-262546","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-cancellation","tag-power-of-attorney","tag-property","tag-registration-act","tag-sale","tag-sale-deed"],"yoast_head":"\nMerely writing "cancelled" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Merely writing "cancelled" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph* and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ., held that mere writing the word “cancelled” or drawing\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-02-26T05:00:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-03-04T03:15:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/\",\"name\":\"Merely writing \\\"cancelled\\\" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-02-26T05:00:39+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-03-04T03:15:00+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Merely writing “cancelled” on registered power of attorney wouldn’t make it null and void: Supreme Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Merely writing \"cancelled\" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Merely writing \"cancelled\" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court","og_description":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph* and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ., held that mere writing the word “cancelled” or drawing","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-02-26T05:00:39+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-03-04T03:15:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/","name":"Merely writing \"cancelled\" on registered power of attorney wouldn't make it null and void: Supreme Court | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg","datePublished":"2022-02-26T05:00:39+00:00","dateModified":"2022-03-04T03:15:00+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/26\/merely-writing-cancelled-on-registered-power-of-attorney-wouldnt-make-it-null-and-void-supreme-court\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Merely writing “cancelled” on registered power of attorney wouldn’t make it null and void: Supreme Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":281767,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/split-verdict-whether-non-production-poa-during-suit-to-prove-sale-deed-which-was-executed-on-strength-of-poa-would-fatal-to-case-of-plaintiff-legal-news-legal-research-updates-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":0},"title":"Whether non-production of Power of Attorney to prove a sale deed would be fatal to the case of the plaintiff?; Supreme Court’s split verdict","author":"Editor","date":"January 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"While Justice Shah stated that the plaintiff had not produced the Power of Attorney, Justice Nagarathna opined that non-production of Power of Attorney was not fatal to the case of the original plaintiff.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-98.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":294230,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/08\/recognition-of-poa-will-agreement-to-sell-as-title-documents-conferring-rights-in-immovable-property-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":1},"title":"Whether power of attorney, will, agreement to sell can be recognised as title documents conferring rights in any immovable property? Supreme Court answers","author":"Apoorva","date":"June 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that the entry of the appellant over part of the suit property is simply as a licencee of the respondent. He does not continue to occupy it in the capacity of the owner. Thus, the licence having been terminated, he has no right to remain in possession\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"conferring rights in immovable property","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263180,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/05\/permanent-injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-sc-reverses-three-concurrent-findings\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":2},"title":"Permanent Injunction can’t be granted against true owner once the title dispute is settled; SC reverses three concurrent findings\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Reversing the concurrent findings of all the Court below in a case where the plaintiff was granted the relief of permanent injunction despite having lost the title, the bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to a relief of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Permanent-Injunction-cant-be-granted-against-true-owner-once-the-title-dispute-is-settled-Supreme-Court-reverses-three-concurrent-findings.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":301796,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/18\/chhattisgarh-hc-facts-deposed-by-power-of-attorney-holder-cannot-be-relied-if-party-to-the-suit-is-not-examined-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":3},"title":"In absence of examination of the party to a suit, facts deposed by the power of attorney holder cannot be relied upon: Chhattisgarh High Court","author":"Editor","date":"September 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe pleading made by respondent-plaintiff through the power of attorney holder in the plaint is to be examined as against the statement made by the power of the attorney holder as a witness.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"chhattisgarh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":249875,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":4},"title":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 16, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay HC\u2019s Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu while discussing, quotes EBC\u2019s C.K. Thakker\u2019 s Code of Civil Procedure","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255469,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/12\/decree-of-specific-performance\/","url_meta":{"origin":262546,"position":5},"title":"Law on Specific Performance | For purpose of passing a decree of specific performance, what is essential? SC explains","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 12, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Stating that readiness and willingness are necessary for the purpose of passing a decree of specific performance, Division Bench of M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ., expressed that, Straightaway to rely upon the affidavit without amending the plaint and the pleadings is wholly impermissible under the law. Factual\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-7-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262546","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=262546"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262546\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/262561"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=262546"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=262546"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=262546"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}