{"id":362879,"date":"2025-10-07T17:00:48","date_gmt":"2025-10-07T11:30:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=362879"},"modified":"2025-10-08T12:24:32","modified_gmt":"2025-10-08T06:54:32","slug":"agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/","title":{"rendered":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Introduction<\/h2>\n

In its decision in Ramesh Chand<\/span> v. Suresh Chand<\/span>1<\/sup><\/a>, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property jurisprudence: whether documents such as an agreement to sell, a general power of attorney (GPA), and a will can by themselves confer ownership rights in immovable property. While in Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd.<\/span> v. State of Haryana<\/span>2<\/sup><\/a> line of cases has already clarified that agreements to sell and GPAs do not amount to valid conveyance, the Court went a step further in this matter to underline that even a registered will cannot by itself create a valid title unless duly proved in accordance with law, particularly when suspicious circumstances surround its execution.<\/p>\n

This judgment3<\/sup><\/a> is significant because it consolidates the jurisprudence around informal property transfers — a practice still common in India — and highlights the evidentiary rigour required when a will is propounded to establish title.<\/p>\n

Case summary<\/h2>\n

Factual background<\/p>\n

The dispute arose between two brothers over ownership of their late father’s property. One of them claimed title on the strength of documents allegedly executed in his favour: an agreement to sell, a GPA, an affidavit with receipt of consideration, and a registered will. The other contested the validity of these documents, asserting long-standing possession and challenging the will in particular as fabricated and suspicious.<\/p>\n

The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the claimant brother, holding the documents sufficient to prove transfer of title, and dismissed the counterclaim. The matter was carried in appeal, where the High Court affirmed the trial court’s findings. However, following the Supreme Court’s subsequent ruling in Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd. (2)<\/span> v. State of Haryana<\/span>4<\/sup><\/a> — which clarified that GPA and agreement to sell transactions do not convey ownership — the case was remanded for reconsideration. Even after remand, the High Court upheld the trial court’s decree, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

Issue<\/p>\n

The central question before the Court was whether the documents relied upon — namely, the agreement to sell, the GPA, and the registered will — conferred valid title in favour of the plaintiff.<\/p>\n

Court’s analysis<\/p>\n

Agreement to sell: The Court reiterated that under Section 54<\/a>5<\/sup><\/a> of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882<\/a>, an agreement for sale does not by itself create any right, title, or interest in immovable property. It merely gives the purchaser a right to seek specific performance of the contract. Citing Suraj Lamp (2)<\/span> case<\/span>6<\/sup><\/a>, the Court emphasised that ownership passes only upon execution of a registered deed of conveyance, and that an agreement to sell, even if accompanied by possession, cannot by itself amount to transfer of ownership.<\/p>\n

General power of attorney: On the issue of the GPA, the Court observed that such an instrument merely creates an agency relationship, empowering the agent to act on behalf of the principal, but does not by itself transfer ownership rights. Relying on State of Rajasthan<\/span> v. Basant Nahata<\/span>7<\/sup><\/a> and again on Suraj Lamp (2) case<\/span>8<\/sup><\/a>, the Court clarified that even an irrevocable GPA does not amount to a conveyance. In the present matter, the GPA relied upon was limited to managing the property and did not contain any express clause evidencing conveyance.<\/p>\n

Registered will: The third and more contested document was the registered will. The Court reiterated that a will, even when registered, is not self-proving and must be established in accordance with the evidentiary standards laid down in the Succession Act, 1925<\/a>9<\/sup><\/a> and the Evidence Act, 1872<\/a>10<\/sup><\/a>. The foundational precedent is H. Venkatachala Iyengar<\/span> v. B.N. Thimmajamma<\/span>11<\/sup><\/a>, where the Court held that a will must be attested by two witnesses, and at least one attesting witness must be examined in Court to prove execution.<\/p>\n

In the present case, the will was surrounded by suspicious circumstances: it bequeathed the entire estate to one son, excluding the others, without explanation. Moreover, the attesting witnesses had not been examined. The Court therefore held the will unproved and incapable of conferring a valid title.<\/p>\n

Analysis of the judgment<\/h2>\n

The doctrines reaffirmed in Ramesh Chand case<\/span>12<\/sup><\/a> are not novel, but part of a long and consistent trajectory of jurisprudence.<\/p>\n

On agreements to sell, the Court in Suraj Lamp (2)<\/span> case<\/span>13<\/sup><\/a> had already clarified that such agreements, even coupled with possession, do not transfer ownership. This was reinforced again in Vinod Infra Developers Ltd.<\/span> v. Mahaveer Lunia<\/span>14<\/sup><\/a>, where the Court held that an unregistered agreement is unenforceable to create title, regardless of possession or consideration. In Ramesh Chand<\/span> judgment15<\/sup><\/a> thus echoes these established principles (also citing Suraj Lamp (2) case<\/span>16<\/sup><\/a>) to leave no ambiguity.<\/p>\n

On GPAs, the principle derives from Basant Nahata case<\/span>17<\/sup><\/a>, where the Court explained that a GPA merely authorises actions on behalf of the principal and cannot transfer ownership. Suraj Lamp (2) case<\/span>18<\/sup><\/a> expanded on this, and Ramesh Chand case<\/span>19<\/sup><\/a> simply applies it, again emphasising that ownership can only be conveyed by a registered sale deed.<\/p>\n

On wills, the evidentiary rigour has been long settled. In H. Venkatachala Iyengar case<\/span>20<\/sup><\/a>, the Court articulated the statutory requirements of attestation and the heightened scrutiny required where suspicious circumstances exist. More recently, in Meena Pradhan<\/span> v. Kamla Pradhan<\/span>21<\/sup><\/a>, the Court reinforced that registration alone is insufficient — the “prudent mind” test must be satisfied, ensuring free will and proper attestation. Similarly, in Kamla Pradhan case<\/span>22<\/sup><\/a>, the Court underscored that wills in contested family disputes demand strict proof. These precedents, some of which were expressly cited in Ramesh Chand case<\/span>23<\/sup><\/a>, demonstrate continuity: the Court has consistently treated wills with caution, especially when they exclude natural heirs.<\/p>\n

Seen together, Ramesh Chand case<\/span>24<\/sup><\/a> is not a new doctrinal development, but a reiteration of settled principles, serving more as a judicial reminder than a fresh exposition of law.<\/p>\n

Conclusion<\/h2>\n

While the Court’s ruling in this matter is essentially a reaffirmation of previously settled law — both in Suraj Lamp (2) case<\/span>25<\/sup><\/a> doctrine on GPA and agreement to sell transactions, and the evidentiary standard for proving wills — it highlights a deeper issue. The reason courts must repeatedly adjudicate on the same points is that property transfers within Indian families are often carried out informally, without structured wills or succession planning.<\/p>\n

This problem is amplified by India’s family structures and demographic realities. It is common knowledge that many Indians die intestate, leaving assets to devolve through statutory succession rules rather than clear testamentary directions. Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs) remain widespread, with over 8,75,000 HUFs claiming tax benefits in 2022-2023, underscoring the continued relevance of family-based property arrangements.26<\/sup><\/a> The absence of structured succession planning in such large, multi-heir families inevitably leads to conflict. Reflecting this, a significant portion of litigation pending before higher courts — including the Supreme Court — relates to contested succession claims.27<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

Moreover, low legal literacy means that despite the law being settled for decades, families continue to rely on informal documents like unregistered agreements, GPAs, or hastily drafted wills, leading to repetitive litigation that drains both personal and judicial resources.28<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n

The way forward lies not merely in courts reiterating these settled principles, but in proactive dissemination of legal knowledge. Awareness initiatives — whether through government policy documents, simplified guides, or court-endorsed summaries of key rulings circulated through the media — could help demystify succession law and prevent recurring disputes. Greater public education on inter-generational property transfers is essential if settled principles of law are to translate into settled practices within Indian families.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n

*Partner, Numen Law Offices. The author acknowledges the work of Srishti Sati (Research Intern) for her valued contribution.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

1.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2.<\/a> (2009) 7 SCC 363<\/a> and Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Ltd. (2)<\/span> v. State of Haryana<\/span>,<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

3.<\/a> Ramesh Chand case,<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

4.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

5.<\/a> Transfer of Property Act, 1882, S. 54.<\/a><\/p>\n

6.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

7.<\/a> (2005) 12 SCC 77<\/a>.<\/p>\n

8.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

9.<\/a> Succession Act, 1925<\/a>.<\/p>\n

10.<\/a> Evidence Act, 1872<\/a>.<\/p>\n

11.<\/a> 1958 SCC OnLine SC 31<\/a>.<\/p>\n

12.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

13.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

14.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1208<\/a>.<\/p>\n

15.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

16.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

17.<\/a> (2005) 12 SCC 77<\/a>.<\/p>\n

18.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

19.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

20.<\/a> 1958 SCC OnLine SC 31<\/a>.<\/p>\n

21.<\/a> (2023) 9 SCC 734<\/a>.<\/p>\n

22.<\/a> (2023) 9 SCC 734<\/a>.<\/p>\n

23.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

24.<\/a> 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1879<\/a>.<\/p>\n

25.<\/a> (2012) 1 SCC 656<\/a> : (2012) 340 ITR 1 : (2012) 169 Comp Cas 133<\/a>.<\/p>\n

26.<\/a> PTI, “Over 8.75 Lakh HUFs Claimed Rs 3803 Crore Tax Deductions in 2022-2023: Finance Ministry”, The Economic Times<\/span> (25-7-2023).<\/p>\n

27.<\/a> Pradeep Thakur, “Property and Family Disputes Account for 76% of Litigation”, Times of India<\/span> (26-4-2016).<\/p>\n

28.<\/a> Sushovan Patnaik, “Supreme Court Review 2024: Clarity and Parity in Marriage and Divorce”, Supreme Court Observer (22-1-2025).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Manasi Chaudhari*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":362882,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[20271,77550],"tags":[90468,78490,90469,78492,90467,75341,90464,89639,90465,90466],"class_list":["post-362879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-experts_corner","category-numen-law-offices","tag-agreementtosell","tag-indianlaw","tag-landdisputes","tag-legalawareness","tag-powerofattorney","tag-propertylaw","tag-realestateindia","tag-supremecourtindia","tag-transferoftitle","tag-willandtestament"],"yoast_head":"\nAgreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property\" \/>\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\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-10-07T11:30:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-10-08T06:54:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"533\" \/>\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:title\" content=\"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title\" \/>\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=\"7 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\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/\",\"name\":\"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-10-07T11:30:48+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-10-08T06:54:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp\",\"width\":800,\"height\":533,\"caption\":\"Transfer of Property Title\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title\"}]},{\"@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":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title | SCC Times","description":"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property","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\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title","og_description":"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-10-07T11:30:48+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-10-08T06:54:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":533,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/","name":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp","datePublished":"2025-10-07T11:30:48+00:00","dateModified":"2025-10-08T06:54:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"In its decision in Ramesh Chand v. Suresh Chand, decided on 1-9-2025, the Supreme Court of India revisited a recurring issue in property","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp","width":800,"height":533,"caption":"Transfer of Property Title"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/07\/agreement-to-sell-power-of-attorney-and-will-supreme-court-reiterates-limits-on-transfer-of-title\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Agreement to Sell, Power of Attorney and Will: Supreme Court Reiterates Limits on Transfer of Title"}]},{"@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\/2025\/10\/Transfer-of-Property-Title.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":362879,"position":0},"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":262546,"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\/","url_meta":{"origin":362879,"position":1},"title":"Merely writing “cancelled” on registered power of attorney wouldn’t make it null and void: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"February 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of K.M. Joseph* 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\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\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-91.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258461,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/14\/explained-can-karta-alienate-joint-hindu-family-property-without-coparceners-signature\/","url_meta":{"origin":362879,"position":2},"title":"Explained| Can Karta alienate Joint Hindu family property without coparcener’s signature?","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a suit where the Karta of a Joint Hindu Family, consisting of himself, his wife and his son, had alienated a property due to legal necessity without the signature of his son, the bench of MR Shah and Sanjiv Khanna*, JJ that the Karta was entitled to\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":[]},{"id":289603,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/15\/unregistered-agreement-to-sell-shall-be-admissible-in-evidence-in-suit-for-specific-performance-supreme-court-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":362879,"position":3},"title":"Unregistered agreement to sell an admissible evidence in a suit for specific performance; Supreme Court upholds Madras High Court Judgment","author":"Apoorva","date":"April 15, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that as per proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 an unregistered document affecting immovable property may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter-II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, or as evidence of any collateral transaction\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"unregistered agreement to sell as evidence","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/unregistered-agreement-to-sell-as-evidence.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/unregistered-agreement-to-sell-as-evidence.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/unregistered-agreement-to-sell-as-evidence.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/unregistered-agreement-to-sell-as-evidence.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":371417,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/01\/2025-scc-vol-10-part-4-latest-supreme-court-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":362879,"position":4},"title":"2025 SCC Vol. 10 Part 4","author":"Editor","date":"January 1, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"2025 SCC Vol. 10 Part 4: Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases on Arbitration, IBC, Service Law, and Transfer of Property.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"2025 SCC Vol. 10 Part 4","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/2025-SCC-Vol.-10-Part-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/2025-SCC-Vol.-10-Part-4.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/2025-SCC-Vol.-10-Part-4.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/2025-SCC-Vol.-10-Part-4.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243845,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/13\/property-dispute\/","url_meta":{"origin":362879,"position":5},"title":"Del HC | “Court has to cut through the web of pleas spun in the written statement”. When should a decree on admissions be passed in a property dispute? Read how the Court refused to allow abuse of its process\u00a0","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 13, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J., passed a decree for recovery of possession in favour of the plaintiffs without a trial, where it was found that the defendants were insisting upon the recording of evidence and a trial only to defer the evil day of a decree being passed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/362879","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=362879"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/362879\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/362882"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=362879"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=362879"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=362879"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}