JUDGMENT

The construction of a power-of-attorney, based on which sale deed has been executed, falls for consideration in these appeals.

2. Two suits were tried together. O.S.No.103/2008 was for mandatory injunction and O.S.No.234/2008 was for partition. O.S.No.103/2008 was decreed concurrently, while O.S.No.234/2008 was dismissed. Two appeals were filed by the plaintiff in O.S.No.234/2008 and defendant in O.S.No.103/2008. These appeals were allowed by judgment dated 07.03.2012 by this Court permitting the plaintiff in O.S.No.234/2008 to amend the pleadings and adduce evidence afresh. The said order was challenged by the plaintiff in O.S.No.103/2008 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by Civil Appeal Nos.4241-4242 of 2016. By order dated 19.04.2016, the judgment of the High Court was set aside and the matter was remanded back to this Court for fresh consideration and hence, these appeals are listed.

3. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are as follows:

3.1. Originally, the property belonged to one Padmanabha Pandit, who had two children, Balachandra Pandit and Madhukar Pandit. On the death of Padmanabha Pandit, the property jointly devolved upon his sons. In 1995,