The validity of the cancellation of the Power of Attorney and the involvement of fraud were central to the court's decision.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 25.02.2019 made in I.A. No.389 of 2018 in O.S. No.21 of 2013 on the file of District Court - II, Kanchipuram.)

1. The present revision is preferred by the third defendant in O.S.No.21 of 2013, which is now pending adjudication before the District Court, Kancheepuram. The suit is laid for a declaration that certain sale deeds dated 24.02.2009 and 10.02.2010 are void. The present revision petitioner has taken out an application in I.A. No.389 of 2018 for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by limitation.

2. The facts on either side are substantially admitted though not the inferences which each of the parties might project :

* A certain block of property measuring about 2.56 acres originally belonged to one Iyer Murali Swaminathan. On 15.11.2005, he sold it to the plaintiff, Sridharan. According to the plaintiff, he was abducted and was made to execute a Power of Attorney dated 24.02.2009 under which he nominated and constituted one R.V.Raajah as his Power Agent. This Raajah is arrayed as the first defendant. On the very day, Raajah had sold the property to the second defendant M/s.Bhalakh Real Estate Private Limited. On 10.12.2010, the second defendant had sold the same property to the third defendant, which is the revision petitioner herein.

* In the meantime on 01.10.2010, the plaintiff cancelled the Power of Attorney, which was executed in favour of the first defendant. He also caused issuance of notice of cancellation of the said Power of Attorney to the first defendant on 07.12.2010, which the latter had received on the next day, on 08.12.2010.

* Immediately after executing a document cancelling the Power of Attorney on 01.10.2010, the plaintiff had executed a Deed of Settlement, settling the said property in favour of his wife. This was on 04.10.2010. However, a few months later, to be precise, on 25.03.2011, the plaintiff cancelled the Settlement Deed he had executed in favour of his wife.

* In this setting, the plaintiff lays a suit for a declaration that both the successive sale deeds executed in favour of defendants 2 and 3 are null and void. He has also raised an alternate relief against the second defendant for creating a charge over the property.

* The third defendant would now come out with an application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, and this came to be dismissed and hence the revision.

3. Mr.Sathish Parasaran, Senior Counsel, appearing for the revision petitioner, submitted that the facts being what they are and as narrated above, the plaintiff alleges in the plaint that he came to know about the alienation made by the Power of Attorney and also the subsequent alienations made by the second defendant in favour of the third defendant only on 22.11.2010 when he verified the encumbrance on the property. He wondered that the conduct of the plaintiff vis-a-vis the nature of allegations he had made in the plaint does not fit into the ordinary course of human conduct. Elaborating the same, the learned senior counsel submitted:

*According to the plaintiff, the Power of Attorney was not executed voluntarily, but forcibly on 24.02.2009. But the plaintiff had taken about 20 months thereafter to cancel the Power of Attorney. He ought to have known that the Power of Attorney is capable of being used and hence the limitation would start from the date on which the Power of Attorney was executed.

*The Plaintiff has not chosen to challenge the genuineness of the Power of Attorney, and as long as it is not challenged, he cannot sustain the prayers for declaration that the sale deed which the Power of Attorney had executed in favour of the second defendant is void.

*Here, the plaintiff is seeking an alternate relief of creating a charge visa- vis first sale deed on the ground that he was not paid any consideration for the property. If at