Ambrose J:

In this action the plaintiff asked the Court to declare null and void a registered mortgage deed, dated 20 May 1960, which purported to assign by way of mortgage in favour of the defendant four houses belonging to the plaintiff.

The mortgage deed was executed by one Syed Abdulrahman bin Abdullah Alsagoff, who purported to act as the plaintiff's attorney under a registered power of attorney dated 16 May 1960. The plaintiff pleaded that the power of attorney was never executed by her, and that she never authorized Syed Abdulrahman to mortgage or otherwise deal with her properties.

The following facts were proved. In 1952, the plaintiff purchased the lands and houses known as Nos. 19 and 21 Jeddah Street and Nos. 254 and 256 Kallang Road, Singapore. The assignments in favour of the plaintiff were duly registered in the Registry of Deeds, Singapore, in 1952. The above-mentioned Syed Abdulrahman and the plaintiff's husband at all material times carried on a partnership business as commission and real estate agents at No. 15 Klang Road, Singapore, under the style of Abdullah Alsagoff & Co. The plaintiff deposited the title deeds of the properties purchased by her with this firm for safe custody. And she appointed the firm to be her agents to collect rents, to pay rates and assessments and to attend to repairs. In May 1960, Syed Abdulrahman gave instructions to Mr. DG Osborne-Jones, an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court, for the preparation of a power of attorney for execution by the plaintiff. And Mr. Osborne-Jones proceeded to Syed Abdulrahman's house on 16 May 1960, to certify the execution of the power of attorney. There Syed Abdulrahman dishonestly introduced a woman named Aminah binte Mohamed

Said to Mr. Osborne-Jones as the plaintiff. Aminah affixed her right thumb-print to the power of attorney in the presence of Mr. Osborne-Jones. In his certificate of execution, Mr. Osborne-Jones stated that he verify believed that woman to be the plaintiff from information given to him by two trustworthy and respectable persons namely, the witnesses who attested the execution of the power. This power of attorney was registered as No. 375/60 on 17 May 1960. It purported to give Syed Abdulrahman authority, inter alia, to mortgage the plaintiff's properties. On 20 May 1960, purporting to act under the registered power of attorney, Syed Abdulrahman executed the mortgage deed referred to above. As a result of this, on 20 March 1962 he was convicted of the offence of dishonestly using as genuine a forged document and sentenced to six years' imprisonment.

I found accordingly that the power of attorney and the mortgage deed were forgeries. It was not disputed that the defendant had no knowledge that they were forgeries and took the mortgage in good faith and for value.

It was pleaded in the defendant's counterclaim:

(1)that the plaintiff's conduct in placing the title deeds of her properties in the hands of Syed Abdulrahman and her husband amounted to a representation that they were her authorized agents in dealing with the properties and

(2)that Syed Abdulrahman being in possession of the title deeds was presumed to be able to deal with the properties as absolute owner thereof, and the plaintiff's failure to limit his authority in his dealings with the properties and/or her negligence in not keeping track of the title deeds misled the defendant in consequence of which it has suffered damage.

Two cases were cited by Counsel for the defendant. One was Goh Choon Seng v. Lee Kim Soo [1925] AC 550; 2 BLSS 437. That case is authority for the proposition that an employer is responsible for damage caused by the negligent act of his servant in carrying out work which he is employed to do, even if the act incidentally involves a trespass which the employer has not authorized. But that proposition seemed irrelevant to the facts of the present case. It was not alleged in the defendant's pleading that anyone was the plaint