PANACHAIL INDUSTRIES Vs. M J JACOB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaint schedule property which is 1.43 acres of rubber plantation devolved on the plaintiff from his father who acquired title and possession over the same under Ext.A1 sale deed. The plaintiff had executed Ext.A2 general power of attorney in favour of the first defendant who was his neighbour in respect of the property. The first defendant on the strength of the power of attorney sold the property to the second defendant under Ext.A3 sale deed for a total consideration of Rs. 75,000/-. The second defendant in turn sold the property to the third defendant partnership firm under Ext.A4 sale deed for a total consideration of Rs. 2,00,000/- . It is in evidence that the third defendant of which defendants 4 and 5 are partners are in absolute possession and control of the plaint schedule rubber plantation.

(2.) The plaintiff issued Ext.A5 lawyer notice cancelling Ext.A2 power of attorney and has filed the suit to set aside Ext.A4 sale deed and for a decree of injunction against the defendants. There is an alternate prayer for realisation of a sum of Rs. .10,00,000/- on the premise that the second defendant has not paid the consideration to the plaintiff. The contention of the plaintiff is that he executed Ext.A2 power of attorney only as security while availing loan from the first defendant. The court below has decreed the suit by declaring Exts.A3 and A4 sale deeds as void and further directing the plaintiff to be put in possession of the property. The defendants 3 to 5 have filed this Appeal Suit strongly assailing the decree of the court below contending inter alia that the sale on the strength of power of attorney is valid.

(3.) The first defendant has been examined as DW.1, the second defendant has been examined as DW.4 and the Manager of the third defendant has been examined as DW.5. The eye witness to the transaction evidenced by Ext.A3 sale deed has been examined as DW.2 and the witness to Ext.A2 power of attorney has been examined as DW.3. We find that the execution of Ext.A2 power of attorney has been duly proved by DW.1 and DW.3 and the execution of Ext.A3 sale deed duly proved by DW.2 in unmistakable terms. Ext.A2 power of attorney confers a general power on the holder and is a registered deed which cannot by any stretch of imagination be said to be spurious. The plaintiff does not deny the execution of Ext.A2 power of attorney even though he contends that the same was executed while availing loan from the first defendant.