Summary
The power of attorney authorized its holder to execute and register a sale deed and receive consideration; the clause allowing principals to present their own signed deeds was additional, not restrictive. The purchaser had paid consideration and had no role in any alleged misuse between the principals and their agent. The criminal case against him was quashed.
Issues
- Whether the power of attorney authorized the holder to execute and register the sale deed without the principals’ signatures.
- Whether the purchaser could be prosecuted for forgery-related offences, and whether Buxar was the proper venue for the sale transaction.
Provisions considered
- Sections 467, 468, 469 and 471, Indian Penal Code, 1860The sale deed was executed under authority granted by the power of attorney; the record disclosed no criminal role by the purchaser in an alleged dispute between the principals and their agent. (¶¶ 3-5, 23-35)
- Section 177, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973The deed, property and consideration were located in Dehradun; the sale transaction did not give rise to a cause of action in Buxar. (¶ 32-35)
Held
- Clauses 3 and 11 authorized the power-of-attorney holder to execute deeds, including a sale deed, receive consideration and arrange registration. Clause 15 additionally authorized presentation for registration of deeds signed by the principals; it did not withdraw the holder’s authority. (¶ 22-30)
- The sale transaction concerned property and execution in Dehradun and gave rise to no cause of action in Buxar. Any remaining dispute was between the principals and their agent. (¶ 31-33)
- The purchaser paid consideration and had no role in executing the power of attorney or any alleged misconduct by the agent. The criminal case against him was unwarranted. (¶ 34-37)
Result
The appeal was allowed. The FIR, cognizance order and consequential proceedings were quashed insofar as they concerned the appellant.