From these foreclosure proceedings, it is clear that the authority to charge the defendant's property to the plaintiff as security for the granting of a bridging loan of $1.4 million to Syarikat Hup Aik Realty Sdn. Bhd. (the developer) was exercised by the defendant's attorney, Ban Hong Keong (Ban), the managing director of the developer, pursuant to a power of attorney dated 25 July 1979. Clause 6 of the power of attorney authorizes Ban to charge the defendant's property, but I consider that the power to do so must be read in its context in the power of attorney to determine the limitations of such power.

From the recitals it would appear that the power to charge is limited to carrying into effect the terms and conditions of a joint venture agreement (the agreement) entered into between the defendant and the developer. Under the terms and conditions of the agreement executed the same day as the power of attorney, the defendant surrendered his property to the developer for the purpose of developing it into a housing estate and under clause 9 of the agreement, the defendant was entitled to 30% of every class of buildings to be constructed on his land, the costs f