HARISH SHARMA Vs. RAJ KUAMR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C.M. NO.12543/2013 (for condonation of delay) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay is condoned.

(2.) Briefly, the plaintiff, Harish Sharma, seeks to impugn a registered General Power of Attorney signed by him in favour of the defendant, Raj Kumar. The plaint, alleged that the appellant purchased, and was in possession of, Property No. C-486-B, Gali No. 20, Bhajanpura, Delhi (hereinafter the "suit property") through sale deed dated 8th February, 2007 for a sale consideration of Rs. 3,05,000/- from one Smt. Sosan Masih. The appellant argued that thereafter, on account of financial constraints in 2009, the defendant, who knew him previously, agreed to advance a loan of Rs. 13,00,000 to him at 2% interest, with repayment stipulated in 6 months. It is claimed however, that in return the defendant required a General Power of Attorney (hereinafter "GPA") to be registered in his favour in respect of the suit property and for possession of the plot to be handed over to him. It is alleged that though the appellant insisted upon the execution and registration of a mortgage deed only, the defendant insisted on a GPA and nothing else. The plaintiff claims that he required the loan to pay the erstwhile owner of the suit property in accordance with a compromise dated 04.08.2009. It is argued that the appellant was not in possession of the suit property on the date of the GPA (03.08.2009), and that he came into possession only on 15.09.2009.

(3.) It is admitted by the plaintiff that possession of the property was given to the defendant subsequently, though it is contended that the GPA was only to secure re-payment of the loan and that the defendant never acquired any independent right or interest in the ownership of the property. Accordingly, the plaintiff claims that when he offered repayment of the loan (with a total payment of Rs. 14,51,500/-), the defendant's claims to the suit property ended.