SINDHU SIDHARTHAN Vs. SIDHARTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein, the husband of the appellant, was the petitioner in O.P.No.220/2013 before the Family Court, Palakkad. The prayers sought for in the petition were for a declaration that the property covered by document No.1027/2007 of the Trichur Sub Registry, executed by the appellant in her capacity as his power of attorney holder, in favour of herself is still owned by him and that the appellant has not obtained any right or title over the petition scheduled property. In the alternative, he has also sought cancellation of document No.1027/2007 of the Trichur Sub Registry on the ground that the same was executed without his consent or knowledge or without any authority and that it was not supported by consideration. He has also sought for a prohibitory injunction restraining the appellant from interfering with his enjoyment of the property and taking income therefrom.

(2.) Respondent is a businessman in UAE for the last more than 30 years. According to him, out of his savings, he had acquired several items of immovable properties in the different villages of Trichur and Alappuzha Districts. For managing and taking income from the properties owned by him, he had executed a power of attorney in favour of the appellant, his wife. That power of attorney was executed at the Indian Embassy in UAE. Later, on the demand of the appellant, on 24.06.2006, he executed Ext.A8, a registered General Power of Attorney bearing No.150/2006 at the Anthikad Sub Registry in favour of the appellant.

(3.) It is the case of the respondent that for various reasons which are not relevant for the purpose of this case, the relationship between the appellant and the respondent became strained and that on 05.02.2007, the respondent called the appellant by phone from UAE and informed her that he was going to revoke the power of attorney. It is stated that accordingly, he came to India on 07.02.2007 at 7.00 a.m. and from the Airport, he directly went to the petition scheduled property, where, Hotel Sidhartha Regency is situated. On reaching the hotel he enquired about the appellant and was told that she was at her residence. Thereupon, along with PW3, an advocate, and PW4, a security guard in the hotel, he went to Chelur Tower, where the appellant was residing. Along with PWs.3 and 4, he went to 4th floor flat of the appellant and rang the calling bell. When the appellant opened the door he informed her that he was cancelling the power of attorney. Thereafter, he sent PW4 back to the hotel and from there, along with PW3, he went to Anthikad Sub Registry where a document writer was waiting for him with Ext.A1, the cancellation deed, ready.