Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bestech India Private Limited vs State Of Haryana And Others on 10 February, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:019001
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
126 (I) CWP-3233-2025
Date of Decision : February 10, 2025
BESTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED -PETITIONER
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS
(II) CWP-3239-2025
DHARAMENDRA BHANDARI AND ANR -PETITIONERS
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS -RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI
Present: Mr. Aashish Chopra, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Rupa Pathania, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Bhupender Singh, D.A.G., Haryana.
Mr. Bharat Bhandari, Advocate
for the respondents No.2 to 6.
***
KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL)
1. The relief(s) claimed in both these writ petitions is alike, therefore, both these writ petitions are amenable for being decided through a common verdict.
2. Concisely, the prayer made in these writ petitions appertains to quashing of registration of the document dated 02.01.2025, titled as 'Revocation of General Power of Attorney', bearing Vasika No.151 (Annexure P-18).
3. The principal argument constructed by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner(s) is that, at the time of registration of the document (supra), although the presence of the petitioner(s) is shown to have been marked and 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 15-02-2025 08:36:56 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:019001 CWP-3233-2025 and CWP-3239-2025 2 the petitioner(s) is stated to have been apprised of the contents of the document (supra), however, the petitioner(s) never appeared before the Sub Registrar concerned at the time of registration. Moreover, since the General Power of Attorney sought to be revoked/cancelled was an irrevocable registered General Power of Attorney, hence the Sub Registrar concerned had no authority to register the document (supra). Consequently, by registering the document (supra), the Sub Registrar concerned violated the provisions of Sections 201 and 202 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
4. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner(s), who has, apart from making the submissions (supra), raised some disputed questions of facts also.
5. Ex facie, it is purely a private dispute between the petitioner(s) and the private respondent(s)/private entities. Moreover, the issues canvassed by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner(s) involve disputed questions of facts, which cannot be adjudicated by this Court in the instant proceedings and that too merely by exchange of affidavits, rather the same require them becoming adjudicated after evidence becomes adduced by the parties before the apposite authority/forum. Therefore, both these writ petitions are dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner(s) to challenge the impugned document (supra) by taking recourse to the apposite statutory remedy(ies).
6. A photocopy of this order be placed on file of connected case.
(KULDEEP TIWARI)
February 10, 2025 JUDGE
devinder
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 15-02-2025 08:36:57 :::