Sudhakar.R v. The District Registrar

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner executed a power of attorney dated 05.08.2022 in favour of the third respondent. Subsequently, the petitioner sought to cancel this power of attorney by presenting a cancellation deed dated 22.12.2022 to the second respondent for registration. The second respondent refused to register the cancellation deed and issued a Refusal Check Slip dated 23.12.2022. The petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the quashing of the refusal and directing the second respondent to register the cancellation deed within a stipulated time.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Registering Authority is justified in refusing to register the cancellation of a power of attorney that was previously executed in favour of an agent who has exercised the authority granted.
2. Whether a power of attorney coupled with interest is revocable without a court order restraining the registration authority from accepting cancellation.
3. The applicability of Sections 202 and 204 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, in the context of revocation and termination of agency where the agent has an interest or has partly exercised the authority.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s Arguments

• The petitioner relied on a previous order dated 24.03.2021 passed by this Court in W.P(MD).Nos.2073 and 2076 of 2021, which dealt with a power of attorney coupled with interest.
• The petitioner contended that the refusal by the second respondent to register the cancellation deed was not justified as no injunction order from the jurisdictional court was obtained by the agent to restrain registration.

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the respondents' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
Order dated 24.03.2021 in W.P(MD).Nos.2073 and 2076 of 2021	Power of attorney coupled with interest cannot be revoked without court intervention.	The Court relied on this order to emphasize that without an injunction restraining registration, the registering authority cannot refuse to register the cancellation deed.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court considered Sections 202 and 204 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Section 202 protects the agent's interest where the agency is coupled with interest, stating that such agency cannot be terminated to the prejudice of that interest without an express contract. Section 204 provides that once the authority has been partly exercised, the principal cannot revoke the authority concerning acts already done.

In the present case, the agent had already exercised the power of attorney by executing a sale deed dated 30.11.2022. This sale deed was previously directed to be registered by the Court. Given that the agent had acted on the authority, revocation was constrained by Section 204.

The Court noted that while the petitioner’s reliance on the earlier order was valid, the agent had not obtained any injunction restraining the registering authority from registering cancellation documents. Thus, in the absence of such an order, the registering authority cannot refuse registration merely on the basis of the agent’s interest.

However, considering the special facts and the prior exercise of authority by the agent, the Court found no reason to interfere with the refusal to register the cancellation deed. The petitioner was given liberty to pursue his rights before the jurisdictional Civil Court.

Holding and Implications

The writ petition is disposed of without interference and no costs are imposed.

The direct effect of this decision is that the refusal by the second respondent to register the cancellation deed stands upheld. The petitioner is permitted to establish his rights through the appropriate civil forum. The Court did not set any new precedent beyond affirming the application of Sections 202 and 204 of the Indian Contract Act in the context of power of attorney revocation and registration.