Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, P.KRISHNA KUMAR
Peter Damiyan S/o Joseph – Appellant
Versus
Messers Oiko Credit Ecumenical Development Co-Operative Society – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute on mortgage and power of attorney validity. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. validity of power of attorney and mortgage is crucial. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. mortgage requires registration for legal effect. (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The decree in a suit for money is under challenge by the 5th defendant. Since the issue involved in the appeal is confined to the liability of the 5th defendant and his properties, only the facts relevant thereto are being adverted.
3. Defendants 1 to 3, while admitting the transaction contended that the suit is barred by limitation.
5. The trial court held that the 4th defendant was the power of attorney holder of the 5th defendant and that the properties of the 5th defendant were mortgaged by the 4th defendant in favour of the plaintiff to secure the credit facility. The court decreed the suit allowing the plaintiff to realise the liability from the mortgaged properties and from defendants 1 and 2.
7. The points that arise for determination in this appeal are :-
(ii) Is there a valid mortgage in favour of the plaintiff in respect of plaint schedule item numbers 1 to 4 properties?
8. Exts.A4 to A7 are ori
A mortgage must be registered to be valid; an unregistered mortgage deed does not affect property rights.
The burden of proof lies with the plaintiff to establish fraud in the execution of registered documents, which carry a presumption of validity.
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 usufructuary mortgage must be in writing and registered to be valid; failure to establish such a mortgage negates the right to seek redemption.
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 power of attorney authorized the attorney to mortgage the property, creating a binding mortgage valid against the family's claims, even if the borrowing parties did not own the property.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of attorney holder has the right to exercise the power given in the power of attorney but cannot use such power for personal benefit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the requisites for a valid mortgage by deposit of title deeds under Section 58(f) of the Transfer of Property....
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
