RATTAN SINGH Vs. AJAIB SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RATTAN Singh filed a suit to challenge the three tale deeds executed by Ajaib Singh as his attorney, mainly on the ground that the power of attorney was a fake document Both the Courts below have held that the power of attorney was duly executed. As a result, the suit was dismissed. This is second appeal by Rattan Singh

(2.) THE only point raised is that on a reading of Sections 32 and 33 of the Registration Act, 1908, (for short 'the Act') show that only such power of attorney can be recognized, which was executed and authenticated by the Registrar or Sub Registrar, within whose district or sub -district, the principal resides. It is urged that Rattan Singh, the principal, belongs to Moga, whereat the power of attorney was got registered with the Sub -Registrar, at Patti in a different district. Merely became the power of attorney has been got registered at a place other than where the principal resides, power of attorney does not lose its real effect. What reading of the aforesaid sections shows is that Sub Registrar of Patti could refuse to register if he had come to know that the principal belonged to another place. If Rattan Singh represented that he belonged to Patti and got the power of attorney registered, in law it would not mean that the power of attorney would not have any legal effect Sections 32 and 33 of the Act, referred to above, do not support the contention.