The termination of agency takes effect only when known to the third party, and third parties are not affected unless they have knowledge of such termination.

B.S. Chauhan, J.-Instant writ petition has been filed against the Judgment and order dated 21st Jun, 1985 (Annexure 3) whereby learned Board of Revenue accepted second appeal of the contesting respondents and reversed the Judgment and order of the Revenue Appellate Authority dated 13-12-1983 (Annexure 2) by which it has affirmed the Judgment and decree of dismissal of suit passed by the trial Court dated 30-5-1983 (Anex. 1).

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case arc that petitioners filed a suit for declaration and possession in the Civil Court against contesting respondents but the Civil Court rejected the said plaint, holding that it had no jurisdiction and plaint was presented subsequently in the Court of Assistant Collector Hanumangarh. Petitioners had alleged in the plaint that after purchasing land in dispute, they had appointed one Roop Ram (Respondent No. 6) as Special Power-of-Attorney for the purpose of managing the land and depositing of instalments etc. on 16-8-1967. in spite of the fact that said power-of-attorney was terminated vide registered notice dated 22-12-1969, Respondent No. 6 executed the said deed of the land in dispute in favour of contesting respondents Duli Chand etc. on 12-2-1970. Thus, it was prayed that the sale-deed was ineffective, inoperative and inconsequential and petitioners may be put back in possession of the land in dispute.

3. Thecontesting respondents/defendants denied allegations made in the plaint. Rather they contended that the petitioners/ plaintiffs were indebted and the land in dispute had been mortgaged. To get the said land released, contesting respondents paid a sum of Rs. 14,500/-and petitioners executed a registered document in favour of Duli Chand that they would pay the said money by 25th June, 1968 and in case said money was not paid they would execute a sale-deed in respect of land in dispute in their favour. They also executed a Special Power-of-Attorney in favour of Roop Ram to execute the said sale-deed.

4. As the money was not paid up to prescribed date i.e. 25-6-1968, Roop Rain, power-of-attorney-holder, extended the date by 6-12-1969 and said extension was duly endorsed by petitioners on 6-7-1968 (Exhibit Dl). Money was not repaid, therefore, time was further extended and said extension was also endorsed by petitioners and they had agreed to execute the sale-deed up to 10th January, 1970. The said endorsement specifically revealed that Duli Chand had been put in actual physical possession of the land in dispute. As the sale-deed was not executed by the petitioners in favour of Duli Chand, it was done by their power-of-attorney-holder. The contesting respondents have no notice of termination of power-of-attorney; therefore, even though termination was there, it could not adversely affect the contesting respondents.

5. The learned trial Court, after considering entire material on record, decreed the suit vide Judgment and decree dated 30-5-1983 (Annexure 1). Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, appeal was preferred by the contesting respondents, which was dismissed by the Revenue Appellate Authority vide Judgment and order dated 13-12-1983 (Annexure 2), Against the said Judgment of the Appellate Authority, a further appeal was preferred before the Board of Revenue, which has been allowed by the impugned Judgment and order dated 21-5-1985 (Annexure 3). Hence, this petition.

6. Heard Shri Sudhir Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Section G. Ojha for Respondents.

7. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has not disputed the fact that contesting respondents had been put in actual physical possession of the land in lieu of money taken from them to the tune of Rs. 14,500/-in 1968 and petitioners had executed a registered document in favour of the contesting respondents that in case money is not repaid, they would execute a sale-deed in their favour of the land in dispute and for that purpose, a power-of -attorney was also executed in f