Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
E.S.INDIRESH
MS KOMAL K DHARAMSHI – Appellant
Versus
MS P B DIVIJA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the case involving property ownership dispute. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. issues framed for trial consideration. (Para 6) |
| 3. defendants' arguments regarding evidence and court fees. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. evaluation of evidence and claims about the power of attorney. (Para 11 , 12 , 15) |
| 5. findings related to the authenticity of signatures and documents. (Para 13 , 14 , 17) |
| 6. conclusion of the appeal and dismissal. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
JUDGMENT :
E.S.INDIRESH, J.
1. This appeal is preferred by the defendant Nos.1 and 4 assailing the Judgment and Decree dated 12.11.2013 in O.S.No.16934/2006 on the file of 28th Addl. City Civil Judge at Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff holding that the General Power of Attorney dated 29.03.2005 is null and void.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred as per their rank before the Trial Court.
3. The plaint averments are that, the plaintiff had purchased the suit schedule property as per the registered Sale Deed dated 09.04.2004 from one Sri. K. Bhaskaran and Smt. Rashmi, and since thereafter, the revenue record stands in the name of the plaintiff. The plaintiff is in possession of the suit
The court established that the General Power of Attorney was fictitious and the sale deed executed under it was null and void, emphasizing the burden of proof lies with the defendants under Section 8....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Power of Attorney was executed as a security for a loan and the sale deed was executed without consideration, making it void.
An agent must act in the principal's best interests; unauthorized sales executed under a power of attorney without consent are fraudulent.
Registered Power of Attorney presumed valid under S.114(e) Evidence Act unless fraud specifically pleaded and proved; lack of Tamil literacy and attesting witness ignorance insufficient to invalidate....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the plaintiff must prove the execution of the agreement for specific performance, and the validity of a sale-deed executed by a power of attor....
Allegations of fraud in property transfers must be substantiated with specific, credible evidence; failing which claims may be dismissed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the death of parties does not necessarily render a suit infructuous, especially when the relief sought is independent of the deceased parties.....
The burden of proof lies on the party asserting facts, with claims of forgery regarding a registered power of attorney necessitating all relevant parties to be joined to the suit for effective adjudi....
A minor can be a transferee of property, and a sale deed executed in their favor is valid despite their incapacity to contract.
Agreement to sell land barred by 10-year transfer prohibition after proprietary rights conferment is unenforceable for specific performance, but earnest money refundable with interest upon proof of p....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
