GNANASEKARAN Vs. N.SUBRAMANIA THEVAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendants in both the suits have come forward with these second appeals, challenging the judgment of the trial Court, which was confirmed by the first appellate Court for declaration of title and injunction in respect of S.A.(MD) No.425 of 2016 and for declaration that the power deed dated 16.05.1980 executed by the second defendant in favour of the plaintiff has not been came into effect and also the sale deed dated 28.07.2009 executed by the second defendant in favour of the first defendant is not binding the plaintiff and also for consequential relief in respect of S.A.(MD) No.426 of 2016.

(2.) The respondent in S.A.(MD) No.425 of 2016 as plaintiff filed O.S.No.132 of 2009, which was later re-numbered as O.S.No.186 of 2010 for declaration stating that the properties purchased by his father Subramania Thevar on 28.10.2004 and he executed a settlement deed in favour of him on 20.01.2009 and from the date of sale onwards, the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the property. The second defendant is non other than his mother, who is the power of attorney, as per the document dated 16.05.1980. Even though divorce has been granted and the power of attorney has been revoked, the second defendant sold the property on the basis of the power of attorney in favour of the first defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff, after issuance of notice, constrained to file the suit for the above stated relief.

(3.) The defendants filed a detailed written statement stating that the deed of power of attorney has been acted upon and in pursuance of the deed of power of attorney, she dealt with the property and she has no knowledge of the revocation of power of attorney.