Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 39 (1.60 seconds)
Documents citing Amar Nath vs Gian Chand on 28 January, 2022

Sp. Vairavan vs The Sub-Registrar on 24 October, 2024

Unfortunately, the parties in Amar Nath [Amar Nath v. Gian Chand, (2022) 11 SCC 460 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 102] , appear to have gone on a wild goose chase. Instead of focussing their attack on the agent (who was the defendant in the suit), for executing the document without any power, the parties focussed their attack on the registering officer for permitting the registration of the document. This resulted in their failure. If a civil court finds that the sale by a power agent was unauthorised, then the question whether the registering officer performed his duties properly or not, would lose its significance. An attack on the authority of the executant of a document, is not to be mixed with the attack on the authority of the registering officer to register the document. The distinction between the execution of a document and the registration of the document is to be borne in mind while dealing with these questions.
Madras High Court Cites 65 - Cited by 0 - J N Banu - Full Document

Sachin Saini vs Mukesh Saini on 28 August, 2024

document nor the agency could be terminated by the principal to the prejudice of the agent's interest unless there is express contract, where the agent has himself an interest in the property which forms the subject of the agency (Sec.202 of Indian Contract Act). He has further argued that even if it is presumed to be valid cancellation, yet the same would not bind the plaintiff because the said cancellation notice was given by the defendant no.1 & 2 to the defendant no.3 only and not to the plaintiff. I find force in his contention because it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amar Nath Vs. Gyan Chand's case (supra) that the termination of Power of Attorney does not affect third party without notice because as per Sec.208 of Contract Act, 1872, the termination of the authority of an agent does not take effect against the agent before it comes to his knowledge and it does not take effect with respect to third person till the same comes to his knowledge. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while taking notice of the view from Pollock and Mulla, the Indian Contract & Specific Relief Act has held as follows:
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mukesh Saini vs Sachin Saini on 28 August, 2024

document nor the agency could be terminated by the principal to the prejudice of the agent's interest unless there is express contract, where the agent has himself an interest in the property which forms the subject of the agency (Sec.202 of Indian Contract Act). He has further argued that even if it is presumed to be valid cancellation, yet the same would not bind the plaintiff because the said cancellation notice was given by the defendant no.1 & 2 to the defendant no.3 only and not to the plaintiff. I find force in his contention because it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amar Nath Vs. Gyan Chand's case (supra) that the termination of Power of Attorney does not affect third party without notice because as per Sec.208 of Contract Act, 1872, the termination of the authority of an agent does not take effect against the agent before it comes to his knowledge and it does not take effect with respect to third person till the same comes to his knowledge. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while taking notice of the view from Pollock and Mulla, the Indian Contract & Specific Relief Act has held as follows:
Delhi District Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next