9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he power is one of principal and agent. A principal is bound by the acts done by an agent or the contracts made by him on behalf of the principal. Likewise, power of attorney in the nature of contract of agency authorizes the holder to do acts specified by the executant, or represent the executant in dealings with third persons. In the case of Syed Abdul Khader v. Rami Reddy & Ors., [1978 (11) TMI 158 - SUPREME COURT], this Court held that the relation between the donor of the power and the donee of the power is one of the principal and agent having its genesis in a contract. It further observed that the term "agency" refers to the relationship in which one person has the authority or ability to establish legal relations between a principal and third parties. This relationship arises when a person, known as the agent, has the authority to act on behalf of another, called the principal, and agrees to do so. In State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nahata, [2005 (9) TMI 620 - SUPREME COURT], while dealing with the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 22A of the Registration Act, it was held that a deed of power of attorney is a document of convenience empowering the agent to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which it was executed; and finally, necessary powers must be implied. Further, a mere use of the word 'irrevocable' in a POA does not make the POA irrevocable. If the POA is not coupled with interest, no extraneous expression can make it irrevocable. At the same time, even if there is no expression to the effect that the POA is irrevocable but the reading of the document indicates that it is a POA coupled with interest, it would be irrevocable. Applying the above exposition of law in the facts of the present case, it is evident from the tenor of POA that is not irrevocable as it was not executed to effectuate security or to secure interest of the agent. The holder of POA could not be said to have an interest in the subject-matter of the agency and mere use of the word 'irrevocable' in a POA would not make the POA irrevocable. The High Court was right in holding that the holder did not have any interest in the POA. When the High Court observes that the power of attorney does not explicitly state the reason for its execution, it implies that its nature is general rather than special. From the independent reading of the POA and the agreement to sell, the submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and substantially" in issue in a suit for injunction, and where a finding on an issue of title is necessary for granting the injunction, with a specific issue on title raised and framed, a specific prayer for a declaration of title is not necessary. As a result, a second suit would be barred when facts regarding title have been pleaded and decided by the Trial Court. In the present suit, the findings on possession rest solely on the findings on title. The Trial Court framed a categorical issue on the ownership of the appellants herein. To summarize, where a finding on title is necessary for granting an injunction and has been substantially dealt with by the Trial Court in a suit for injunction, a direct and specific prayer for a declaration of title is not a necessity. Conclusion - The GPA and the agreement to sell were contemporaneous documents executed by the original owner in favor of the holder, but this alone cannot be a factor to conclude that she had an interest in the POA. Even if such an argument were to persuade the Court, the document must have been registered as per Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act. The practice of transferring an immovable property via a GPA a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al City Civil & Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City. A. FACTUAL MATRIX 4. The description of the parties before this Court, the High Court and before the Trial Court is tabulated as follows : - BEFORE THIS COURT BEFORE THE HIGH COURT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT REMARKS Muniyappa - - Original Owner A. Saraswathi - - Holder of POA Appellants Petitioners Plaintiff in O.S. No. 4045/2008 Defendant in suit instituted by the respondent no. 9 Respondent Nos. 1-6 Respondent Nos. 1-6 Defendant Nos. 1-6 Legal heirs of original owner Respondent No. 7 Respondent No. 7 Defendant No. 7 Purchaser Respondent No. 8 Respondent Nos. 8-10 Defendant No. 8 Purchaser Respondent No. 9/Answering Respondent Respondent No. 11 Plaintiff in O.S. No. 133/2007 Defendant no. 9 in suit instituted by the appellants/Gift Deed Holder Appellant no. 2 was represented by his general power of attorney holder i.e., appellant no. 1, for the purposes of the appeal before the High Court and this Court. 5. The dispute arises from a common claim put forward by the appellants and the answering respondent on property bearing Site No. 10, out of Sy. No. 55/1, situated at Chunchaghatta Village, Utt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and approach BDA for reconvey of Schedule property, to pay all betterment charges and to do all connected things. 6) In case of complications to sue such matters in proper courts, of law by engaging the service of advocates or advocate, sign all forms, vakalath, suits, petitions, etc, produce any documents in court, take any documents from the court, give evidence, obtain decree, execute the sale or enter into compromise. 7) The Schedule property is in my peaceful possession and enjoyment thereof as absolute owner thereof. 8) My Attorney is generally entitled to do all such acts, deeds and things, in respect of the Schedule property, which are not specifically written hereunder and I do hereby agree to ratify confirm all such acts, deeds and things done by my attorney as the acts, deeds and things done by me in person and this G.P.A. is irrevocable in nature. SCHEDULE Site No. 10, out of Sy. No. 55/1, situated at Chunchaghatta Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, measuring East to West 30 feet and North to South (40-6" + 42-3")/2 feet and bounded as follows:- East by: Property No. 11 West by: Property No. 9 North by: Road & South by: Private Proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Khata of the Schedule Property to the name of the purchaser. The Vendor assures the purchaser that the schedule property is free from all kinds of encumbrances and it is free from all taxes. SCHEDULE:- Site No. 10, out of Sy. No. 55/1, situated at Chunchaghatta Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, measuring East to West 30 feet and North to South (40-6" + 42-3")/2 feet and bounded as follows:- East by: Property No. 11 West by: Property No. 9 North by: Road & South by: Private Property In witnesses whereof both the parties have affixed their signatures to this sale agreement on the day, month and the year above first written. WITNESSES: 1. 2. 3. VENDOR PURCHASER" 7. On the same day, the said POA was duly notarized. On 30.01.1997, the original owner, executant of the POA died. On 01.04.1998, the holder of POA executed a registered sale deed with respect to the Suit Property in favour of her son, i.e., the appellant no. 2, in exchange of sale consideration of Rs. 84,000/-. 8. On the other hand, several years after the death of the original owner, his legal heirs through a registered sale deed dated 21.03.2003 sold the same Suit Property ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty from the respondent no. 7 for total sale consideration of Rs. 90,000/- and then respondent no. 8 gifted the property to the answering respondent vide the registered gift deed dated 06.12.2004. While, evaluating the evidence adduced by the appellants (defendants therein) the Trial Court from the cross-examination of appellant no. 1 recorded that two days prior to 01.04.1998, he had visited the Office of Sub-Registrar and found that the revenue site was being registered. Further, it was an admitted position that, though allegedly, a general power of attorney ("GPA") and agreement to sell were executed by the original owner in favour of the holder in the year 1986, yet the appellant no. 2 was not in possession of the Suit Property as on the date of the institution of the suit. The Trial Court held that the answering respondent is the donee of the Suit Property and is in lawful possession and that the appellant no. 2 is not entitled to seek recovery of possession. (ii) Secondly, on the issue of legality of registered sale deed dated 21.03.2003 that was executed by the respondent nos. 1-6 in favour of the respondent no. 7, the Trial Court proceeded with the premise that it was a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, the appellants/judgment debtor, preferred First Appeal. The High Court framed the following points for determination:- "14. In the light of the above, the points that arise U for my consideration in this appeal are:- 1] Whether the appellant herein (plaintiff in O.S.No.4045/2008) proves that he is the absolute owner of the suit schedule property? 2] Whether the registered Sale Deed dated 01-04-1998 in favour of the plaintiff in O.S.No.4045/2008 executed by Smt. A. Saraswathi as a General Power of Attorney holder would convey a valid title in favour of the plaintiff? 3] Whether the plaintiff in O.S.No.133/2007 would prove that she is in lawful possession of the property as on the date of the institution of the suit? 4] Whether the plaintiff ln O.S.No.133/2007 has proved that there was an interference in her lawful possession of the suit schedule property by the defendants? 5] Whether the common judgment and the decrees under appeals deserve interference at the hands of this Court?" 14. The High Court dismissed both the appeals and thereby affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court. The High Court dismissed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... executed on 01.04.1998 i.e., after the death of the executant. The said sale deed was executed by the holder of POA in her capacity as a GPA holder of the original owner. Therefore, the execution of sale deed dated 01.04.1998 was after the death of the executant of GPA. The appellants submitted that since the holder had an interest in the POA, it should be read along with the agreement to sell which was executed pursuant to sale consideration. The High Court while addressing the aforesaid submissions of the appellants held that though the GPA and the agreement to sell were executed by the same executant on the same day in favour of the same holder yet they cannot be treated as a single transaction. The detailed and comprehensive reading of the GPA and the agreement to sell would indicate that the contents of the GPA do not mention anything about the execution or purpose of executing the agreement to sell or vice versa. The relevant observations read as under:- "...Even though it is observed that Exs.D-4 and D-5 were contemporaneous documents executed by Sri. Muniyappa @ Ruttappa in favour of Smt. A. Saraswathi, by that itself, it cannot be concluded that, the said Smt. A. Saraswa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... POA. The relevant observations read as under:- "38. Illustration (a) to Section 202 of the Contract Act is clear and applicable to those cases where the very purpose or execution of the Power of Attorney is to enable the Power of Attorney to get his/her entitlement paid to him/her. It is in that case, the attorney holder can be called as having interest in the General Power of Attorney executed in his/her favour, whereas, in the case on hand, as already observed above, the purpose for which the General Power of Attorney was executed by Sri. Muniyappa @ Ruttappa is nowhere made clear either in Ex.D-4 or Ex.D5. Merely because they are contemporaneous documents, it cannot be inferred that the holder of the said agreement would get an interest under the General Power of Attorney so as to over come Section 201 of the Contract Act and fall within the scope of Section 202 of the same Act. This is clear in all the three judgments referred above which were relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents. Rather in those situations, where the sale agreement holder though was put in possession and had already parted with some consideration, the remedy available to such agreement hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct-matter of the agency being irrevocable. By placing reliance on Section 202 of the Contract Act, he submitted that where the agent himself has interest in the property which forms a subject-matter of the agency, the agency cannot be terminated to the prejudice of such interest of the agent. In the facts of the case, Section 202 of the Contract Act is applicable and not Section 201. 18. It was further submitted that the High Court erred in holding that the purpose for which the GPA and the agreement to sell was executed was not mentioned in either of the documents and therefore, even though the two documents are contemporaneous yet it cannot be inferred that the holder of the two documents would derive an interest in the subject-matter of the GPA. Ms. Rehmani asserted that it has to be inferred that the original owner executed the agreement to sell as a consequence of executing the GPA in favour of the holder, hence, the said POA is not irrevocable merely for the reason that in the said documents the purpose for executing the GPA and agreement to sell has not been mentioned. 19. While drawing the Court's attention to para 26 of Suraj Lamp (supra), she submitted that the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Wajid Pasha (supra) to submit that the contract of agency gets automatically terminated by death of either of the parties. As soon as the executant of POA dies, the right given to the agent comes to an end. Once the agency is terminated, the agent cannot act on the basis of the power granted to him under the GPA. He also placed reliance on Prahlad (supra) to submit that a POA granted by the donor to the donee is operative and effective only during the lifetime of the donor. Since the donor and done are in a relationship of master-agent a POA cannot stand after the death of the donor. He asserted that the principle of nemo dat quod non habet would apply meaning thereby that the holder of POA could not have passed a title that she did not possess. 23. Mr. Thakur further submitted that even if for the sake of argument, it is presumed that the GPA was coupled with interest and Section 202 of the Contract Act comes into operation, still it can apply only to an extent that the buyer can enforce the agreement against the vendor or his legal representatives for specific performance or for return of the sale consideration paid. Lastly, he submitted that it is not the case of the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of General Power of Attorney 27. A power of attorney derives its basic principles from Chapter X of the Contract Act which provides for "Agency" along with Sections 1A and 2 respectively of the Powers of Attorney Act, 1882. Agency is a fiduciary relationship between two persons, where one explicitly or implicitly agrees that the other will act on their behalf to influence their legal relations with third parties, and the other similarly agrees to act in this capacity or does so based on an agreement. The relationship between the executant of a general power of attorney and the holder of the power is one of principal and agent. A principal is bound by the acts done by an agent or the contracts made by him on behalf of the principal. Likewise, power of attorney in the nature of contract of agency authorizes the holder to do acts specified by the executant, or represent the executant in dealings with third persons. 28. In the case of Syed Abdul Khader v. Rami Reddy & Ors., reported in (1979) 2 SCC 601, this Court held that the relation between the donor of the power and the donee of the power is one of the principal and agent having its genesis in a contract. It further observed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned by Chapter X of the Contract Act. By reason of a deed of power of attorney, an agent is formally appointed to act for the principal in one transaction or a series of transactions or to manage the affairs of the principal generally conferring necessary authority upon another person. A deed of power of attorney is executed by the principal in favour of the agent. The agent derives a right to use his name and all acts, deeds and things done by him and subject to the limitations contained in the said deed, the same shall be read as if done by the donor. A power of attorney is, as is well known, a document of convenience. 14. Besides the Contract Act, the Powers-of-Attorney Act, 1882 deals with the subject. Section 1-A of the Powers-ofAttorney Act defines power of attorney to include any instruments empowering a specified person to act for and in the name of the person executing it. Section 2 of the said Act reads, thus: "2. Execution under power of attorney.-The donee of a power of attorney may, if he thinks fit, execute or do any instrument or thing in and with his own name and signature, and his own seal, where sealing is required, by the authority of the donor of the power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which forms the subject-matter of the agency, the agency cannot be terminated to the prejudice of such interest unless there is an express stipulation to the contrary. 34. Illustration (a) to Section 202 of the Contract Act states that A (principal) has given authority to B (agent) to sell A's land, and to pay himself i.e., the agent, from the proceeds the debt which is due to him from A. Illustration (b) states that A (principal) has consigned 1,000 bales of cotton to B (agent), who has given an advance on the bales of cotton. Now, A wishes B to sell the cotton and recover his advance from the sale proceeds. In both the cases, A can neither revoke the authority nor agency will be terminated by his insanity or death. It is important to take a note that in both the cases, the agent has an interest vested in the subjectmatter of the agency. The factum of interest or security of the agent, in both cases, does not imply that the agent's right to remuneration constitutes an interest in the subject matter of the agency; rather, it extends beyond the mere advancement of remuneration or commission. Where POA is coupled with an interest, it metamorphosizes to an irrevocable agency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty being sold or in the proceeds of sale until sale is complete. The relevant observations are reproduced hereinbelow:- "5. For the plaintiff, Vishnucharya v. Ramchandra [[1881] 5 Bom. 253.], has been cited, in which it has been held that an agent for the collection of rents cannot be regarded as having an interest in the property merely because he is authorized to take his salary out of the rents. It is objected on behalf of the defendants that this decision runs directly contrary to Illus. (a), S. 202. But I find that a similar view has been taken in Lakhmiohand v. Chotooram [[1900] 24 Bom. 403.], in which the facts more closely resemble those of the present case and it was held that the interest which an agent has in effecting a sale and the prospect of remuneration to arise therefrom is not such an interest as would prevent the termination of the agency. 6. I am in respectful agreement with the decisions in these two Bombay cases. They and the case before me are clearly distinguishable from the case stated in Illus. (a), Section 202 of the Contract Act. In the illustration, the principal was under a liability to the agent quite apart from the contract of agency, and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ree. It provides that his remuneration is to be one-half of the proceeds. It contains an indemnity clause against any out-of-pocket expenses which he is entitled also to recover from the amount of the decree. But the object of the power-of-attorney is not for the purpose of protecting or securing any interest of the agent. I think that part of the agreement is purely incidental. There is, however, another feature of this document which seems to me to be conclusive against the appellants. The last words, "I shall not for any reason whatever, cancel without your permission this authority which I have given to you, without paying the amount expended by you and without giving the aforesaid relief for your trouble", seem to me to make express provision for the revocation of the above power. It can be done in two ways, (a) by consent, for that is what I understand "your permission" to mean, and (b) if that permission is withheld, on payment by the principal of all out-of-pocket expenses and also remuneration for his services. With regard to remuneration, the wording is vague, "without giving the aforesaid relief for your trouble". (Emphasis supplied) 39. To the same effect is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apply for sanctioning of plan for the purpose of construction, utilize the Scheduled Property as the holder deems fit and receive all profits therefrom. Para 5 states that the attorney has the power to represent the holder in all Government Offices and do all things connected. Para 6 states that the attorney can pursue matters in courts, give evidence, obtain decree, execute the same. Further, para 7 states that the Scheduled Property is in owner's peaceful possession and enjoyment. Lastly, para 8 states that the attorney is generally entitled to do all acts required in respect of the Suit Property which are not specifically mentioned and that the GPA is irrevocable. b. Nature of Power of Attorney 41. It is now appropriate to analyze the nature of the GPA, specifically whether it is general or special. While construing a document, a reader should not go by the title to the document or the nomenclature of the document. In such a case, the court is endowed with a duty to see the contents of the document and intention of the parties which can be gathered from the terms of the document and/or from circumstances under which the document was entered into. The intention of the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use we think that the words of the document, taken by themselves, are not so clear in their meanings as the learned Judicial Commissioner thought they were. --xxx-- 13. The learned Judicial Commissioner had, in our opinion, overlooked several well-known rules of interpretation: firstly, that, a word used in a document has to be interpreted as a part of or in the context of the whole; secondly, that, the purpose of the powers conferred by the power of attorney have to be ascertained having regard to the need which gave rise to the execution of the document, the practice of the parties, and the manner in which the parties themselves understood the purpose of the document; and, thirdly, that, powers which are absolutely necessary and incidental to the execution of the ascertained objects of the general powers given must be necessarily implied." (Emphasis supplied) 45. Further, a mere use of the word 'irrevocable' in a POA does not make the POA irrevocable. If the POA is not coupled with interest, no extraneous expression can make it irrevocable. At the same time, even if there is no expression to the effect that the POA is irrevocable but the reading of the document ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hen was), held thus: "The general principles regarding the construction of power of attorney are well settled. Powers of attorney must be strictly construed as giving only such authority as they confer expressly or by necessary implication. Where an act purporting to be done under the power of attorney is challenged as being in excess of the power, it is necessary to show that on a fair construction of the whole instrument the authority in question is to be found within the four corners of the instrument either by express terms or by necessary implication. Some of the principles governing the construction of a power of attorney are:(1) the operative part of the deed is controlled by the recitals, (2) where an authority is given to do particular acts, followed by general words, the general words are restricted to what is necessary for the performance of the particular acts, (3) the general words do not confer general powers but are limited to the purpose for which the authority is given and are construed as enlarging the special powers only when necessary for that purpose; (4) a power of attorney is construed so as to include all medium powers necessary for its effective execution ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uate in a district in which, and if they have been executed on or after the date on which, Act No. XVI of 1864, or the Indian Registration Act, 1866, or the Indian Registration Act, 1871, or the Indian Registration Act, 1877, or this Act came or comes into force, namely:- (a) instruments of gift of immovable property; (b) other non-testamentary instruments which purport or operate to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, to or in immovable property; (c) non-testamentary instruments which acknowledge the receipt or payment of any consideration on account of the creation, declaration, assignment, limitation or extinction of any such right, title or interest; and (d) leases of immovable property from year to year, or for any term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent; (e) non-testamentary instruments transferring or assigning any decree or order of a Court or any award when such decree or order or award purports or operates to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish, whether in present or in future, any right, titl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able property by [Government]; or (viii) any instrument of partition made by a Revenue-Officer; or (ix) any order granting a loan or instrument of collateral security granted under the Land Improvement Act, 1871, or the Land Improvement Loans Act, 1883; or (x) any order granting a loan under the Agriculturists, Loans Act, 1884, or instrument for securing the repayment of a loan made under that Act; or (xa) any order made under the Charitable Endowments Act, 1890 (6 of 1890), vesting any property in a Treasurer of Charitable Endowments or divesting any such Treasurer of any property; or (xi) any endorsement on a mortgage-deed acknowledging the payment of the whole or any part of the mortgage-money, and any other receipt for payment of money due under a mortgage when the receipt does not purport to extinguish the mortgage; or (xii) any certificate of sale granted to the purchaser of any property sold by public auction by a Civil or Revenue-Officer. Explanation.-A document purporting or operating to effect a contract for the sale of immovable property shall not be deemed to require or ever to have required registration by reason only of the fact that such document contains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccount to the extent of the transfer of an immovable property." (Emphasis supplied) 53. Even from the combined reading of the POA and the agreement to sell, the submission of the appellants fails as combined reading of the two documents would mean that by executing the POA along with agreement to sell, the holder had an interest in the immovable property. If interest had been transferred by way of a written document, it had to be compulsorily registered as per Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act. The law recognizes two modes of transfer by sale, first, through a registered instrument, and second, by delivery of property if its value is less than Rs. 100/-. 54. This principle was recently elaborated by the High Court of Karnataka in Channegowda & Anr. v. N.S. Vishwanath & Ors., reported in 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 153. The relevant portion is reproduced as under:- "14. An attempt is made on behalf of the plaintiffs to contend that the second plaintiff has sold the property as a General Power of Attorney Holder and not as a title holder. It is argued that the Power of attorney is not compulsorily registrable. The submission is noted with care. Suffice it to note that a deed of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /will transfers" do not convey title and do not amount to transfer, nor can they be recognised or valid mode of transfer of immovable property. The courts will not treat such transactions as completed or concluded transfers or as conveyances as they neither convey title nor create any interest in an immovable property. They cannot be recognised as deeds of title, except to the limited extent of Section 53-A of the TP Act. Such transactions cannot be relied upon or made the basis for mutations in municipal or revenue records. What is stated above will apply not only to deeds of conveyance in regard to freehold property but also to transfer of leasehold property. A lease can be validly transferred only under a registered assignment of lease. It is time that an end is put to the pernicious practice of SA/GPA/will transactions known as GPA sales." (Emphasis supplied) iv. Effect of Suit for Injunction simpliciter 57. The appellants submitted that the answering respondent had not challenged the validity of the GPA and the agreement to sell dated 04.04.1986 executed in favour of the holder and registered sale deed dated 01.04.1998 executed in favour of appellant no. 2. The appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 355 : ILR (1965) 1 Mad 232] held (see para 8 therein) that the previous suit was only for injunction relating to the crops. Maybe, the question of title was decided, though not raised in the plaint. In the latter suit on title, the finding in the earlier suit on title would not be res judicata as the earlier suit was concerned only with a possessory right. These two decisions, in our opinion, cannot be treated as being contrary to each other but should be understood in the context of the tests referred to above. Each of them can perhaps be treated as correct if they are understood in the light of the tests stated above. In the first case decided by this Court, it is to be assumed that the tests above-referred to were satisfied for holding that the finding as to possession was substantially rested on title upon which a finding was felt necessary and in the latter case decided by the Madras High Court, it must be assumed that the tests were not satisfied. As stated in Mulla, it all depends on the facts of each case and whether the finding as to title was treated as necessary for grant of an injunction in the earlier suit and was also the substantive basis for grant of injunction. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no issue relating to title, the court will not investigate or examine or render a finding on a question of title, in a suit for injunction. Even where there are necessary pleadings and issue, if the matter involves complicated questions of fact and law relating to title, the court will relegate the parties to the remedy by way of comprehensive suit for declaration of title, instead of deciding the issue in a suit for mere injunction. (d) Where there are necessary pleadings regarding title, and appropriate issue relating to title on which parties lead evidence, if the matter involved is simple and straightforward, the court may decide upon the issue regarding title, even in a suit for injunction. But such cases, are the exception to the normal rule that question of title will not be decided in suits for injunction. But persons having clear title and possession suing for injunction, should not be driven to the costlier and more cumbersome remedy of a suit for declaration, merely because some meddler vexatiously or wrongfully makes a claim or tries to encroach upon his property. The court should use its discretion carefully to identify cases where it will enquire into title and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bligation or liability and who is or are the person(s) presently having right, title, and interest in the property. It gives solemnity of form and perpetuate documents which are of legal importance or relevance by recording them, where people may see the record and enquire and ascertain what the particulars are and as far as land is concerned what obligations exist with regard to them. It ensures that every person dealing with immovable property can rely with confidence upon the statements contained in the registers (maintained under the said Act) as a full and complete account of all transactions by which the title to the property may be affected and secure extracts/copies duly certified." Registration of documents makes the process of verification and certification of title easier and simpler. It reduces disputes and litigations to a large extent." (Emphasis supplied) G. CONCLUSION 63. For all the aforesaid reasons, we have reached the conclusion that no error not to speak of any error of law could be said to have been committed by the High Court in passing the impugned judgment. 64. As a result, the appeals stand dismissed. Parties shall bear their own costs. Pending app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
