Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Adv. Mr. Harpreet Singh, Adv. M/s. K J John and Co, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Devendra Singh, AOR Mr. Anant Kumar Vatsya, Adv. Mr. Sameer Singh, Adv. Ms. Neelam Singh, Adv. Mr. Vatsya Krishnaiya, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Sahil Lochab, Adv. Mr. Vivek Mishra, Adv.

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

1. Validity of Power of Attorney and Its Cancellation:
2. A power of attorney can only be revoked through a legally recognized process, which must include proper communication to relevant parties to be effective (!) (!) .
3. The mere act of writing ‘cancelled’ on the original power of attorney does not automatically cancel the authority unless the cancellation is properly registered and communicated (!) (!) .

4. Evidence such as correspondence and witness testimony indicated that the power of attorney was not effectively canceled before the execution of the sale deed, undermining the plaintiff’s claim that the authority was withdrawn (!) (!) (!) .

5. Authority to Execute and Present Sale Deed:

6. A registered power of attorney, when valid, authorizes the holder to present a sale deed for registration without the original document, provided the power of attorney was not canceled and was properly recognized (!) (!) (!) .

7. The presentation and registration of the sale deed by the agent, who was authorized under a valid power of attorney, are legally permissible, even if the original power of attorney was not physically produced at the time, as long as the copy was certified and duly registered (!) (!) (!) .

8. Effect of Cancellation and Communication:

9. Cancellation of a registered power of attorney must be executed through a registered document and properly communicated to third parties, including the agent and the other involved parties, to be effective (!) (!) .

10. Evidence such as correspondence between the parties and witness testimonies indicated that the alleged cancellation was not properly communicated or registered, thus the authority of the agent remained in effect at the time of sale (!) (!) .

11. Validity of Sale and Legal Procedures:

12. The sale deed executed by the agent holding a valid, unrevoked power of attorney is legally binding and confers valid title, unless the cancellation was legally recognized and communicated (!) (!) .

13. The registration process, including compliance with relevant registration provisions and proper identification of the parties, was properly conducted, supporting the legitimacy of the sale (!) (!) (!) .

14. Role of Evidence and Court Findings:

15. Evidence such as letters, witness testimonies, and official records demonstrated that the power of attorney was not properly canceled before the sale, and the sale was executed within the scope of the agent’s authority (!) (!) (!) .

16. The courts emphasized that the cancellation of a registered power of attorney requires proper legal procedures, including registration and clear communication, which were not satisfied in this case (!) (!) .

17. Court’s Conclusion:

18. The sale executed by the agent under a valid, unrevoked power of attorney is valid, and the alleged cancellation did not have legal effect due to procedural deficiencies (!) (!) .
19. The appeal was allowed, and the earlier judgment declaring the sale invalid was set aside, affirming the validity of the transaction based on the evidence and legal principles discussed (!) .

These points collectively highlight that the legal validity of the sale depended on the proper execution, recognition, and communication of the cancellation of the power of attorney, which, in this case, was not established according to legal requirements.