ASHOK KUMAR KEDIA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) T. George Joseph, C. C. R. A. Heard the learned Counsel for the revisionist and departmental representative.

(2.) THE facts of the case are as follows: Radhey Shyam son of Brij Lal exeuted a lease deed in favour of Smt. Kalawati, his wife, Ashok Kumar, his son, and Smt. Vijaya Devi, wife of Ashok Kumar. This lease-deed was for a period of 32 years. However, this deed is not in question in the present proceedings. THE relevant document under scrutiny in these proceedings is a Power of Attorney executed by Smt. Kalawati and Smt. Vijaya Devi in favour of Sri Ashok Kumar. This Power of Attorney authorises Ashok Kumar to obtain a loan from LIC, construct a building on the land and let out the building to any person on rent. He was also authorised to sell the land, if required. THE relevant portion in the document says as follows: "we further agree and convenant that the so long as the advances made by the LIC of India or any other financial Bodies on the basis of the document executed by our Attorney in pursuance of this power have not been re-paid in full, the power shall be irrevocable. "

(3.) IF the Court is under compulsion to categorise the document either as irrevocable or as revocable and the document clearly declares itself as irrevocable for a specific period, this Court finds it impossible and illogical to term the document as revocable. Therefore the document has to be put in the category of irrevocable document.