Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR vs Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S — 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S. 2---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 182---Power of attorney---Right of attorney to sell/gift principal's property---Pre-requisites---If an attorney intends to exercise right of sale/gift in his favour or in favour of next of his kin, he/she has to consult the principal before exercising that right---If an attorney on the basis of power of attorney, even if "general", purchases the property for himself or for his own benefit, he should firstly obtain the consent and approval of principal after acquainting him with all the material circumstances. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN "Surrender" and "release" of right---Distinction---Surrender presupposes the possession or ownership of the thing that is to be given up which may be expressed or implied such as give up, discharge, or abandon a right of action, whereas a release is the giving or discharging of a right of action which a man has or may claim against another or that which is his---Express release is one which is distinctly made in the deed or a release by operation of law which, though not expressly made but the law presumes in consequence of some act of the releaser. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S. 202---Powers-of-attorney act (VII of 1882), S. 2---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), Ss. 39, 42, 54 & 55---Suit for declaration, cancellation, permanent and mandatory injunction---Power-of-attorney, interpretation of---Plot transferred by attorney by relying on an irrevocable general power of attorney issued by the plaintiff---Legality---Though the execution of the power of attorney was admitted but the deceased plaintiff during his evidence deposed that at the time of execution of the irrevocable general power of attorney it did not contain any provision of sale of the suit plot and said power to sell was fraudulently included---On the contrary, the conditions in the indenture of power of attorney were numbered sequentially as Clause No.1 to Clause No.18---Clause 12, encompassed the specific power to sell the plot---No manipulation or forgery was discovered in the power of attorney in which all clauses were mentioned in seriatim---Neither the principal (plaintiff) ever cancelled or revoked the power of attorney, nor denied to have executed the wide-ranging power of attorney which indenture in its pith and substance was tantamount to a sort of a surrender of rights and release in favour of the attorney---In terms of the power-of-attorney the principal/plaintiff allowed the attorney to apply and secure the plot on her own funds and also raise construction at her own expense with further power to sell unconditionally and unqualifiedly which amounted to a surrender of rights even before the stage of allotment of plot in a tangible form and this was the reason the defendant in the suit took the specific plea that she bought this right on payment of certain amount to the plaintiff and also produced the receipts of amount paid to the development authority for effectuating the allotment of plot---In the same semblance, the plaintiff also intimated the name of defendant as his nominee in the application form of plot instead of his own sons, daughter and wife---Power-of-attorney in question was also protected under section 202 of Contract act, 1872, which was neither cancelled or revoked by the principal nor any prayer was made for its cancellation in the suit and as a matter of fact, during its currency certain third party interests were also created---Plot was transferred in the name of petitioner-defendant on 09-11-1997, whereas the civil suit was filed on 24-08-2009 after an inordinate delay without any plausible justification or explanation---No commonsensical reason was put forward as to why and how the plaintiff was prevented from making the necessary inquiry from the development authority with regard to the status of the plot---Nothing was placed on record to address whether any payment was made by the plaintiff in consideration of the allotment of the plot, nor any action was taken by him for revocation of irrevocable general power of attorney, nor any evidence was led that the plaintiff refunded any amount to the petitioner which was paid to the development authority on behalf of the plaintiff pursuant to the power of attorney---Suit was rightly dismissed by the Trial Court. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S. 2---Power of attorney---Interpretation---Dialect and phraseology of power of attorney should be construed strictly and sternly. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S. 2---Registration Act (XVI of 1908), S. 33(4)---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 95---Power of attorney---Presumption of truth and genuineness---Documentary evidence, particularly for a registered document, enfolds a presumption of truth and genuineness and such presumption of truth is attached to the registered power of attorney which is admissible unless its genuineness is suspected and proved to be counterfeited or deceptive; its admissibility cannot be doubted to impede the agent from acting on behalf of principal unless the indenture of power of attorney is controverted and repudiated with satisfactory evidence. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN art. 129---Presumption---Scope---Presumption is a rule of law that ascribes a straightforward probative denomination to accurate statistics and fosters a high degree of probability unless upset and annulled by evocative proof to the satisfaction of the Court and in the event of two equal presumptions, the Court may prefer that which best accords to the facts and circumstances of the case. Head NotesCase Description Citation Name: 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR VS Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S. 2---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 182---Power of attorney---Scope---Powers of the agent/attorney---Scope---Power of attorney is a legal authorization that gives a designated person a written sanction and endorsement to stand in for or act on another's behalf in different events, businesses or legal matters having fiduciary relationship with the principal, being responsible to manage the affairs in terms of powers vested in the indenture and execute all necessary legal or other business related and/or personal documents in line with this authority---Principal may allow an agent to handle a variety of activities including the execution of contracts, dealing with property affairs, overseeing and governing financial affairs and managing and supervising diverse or multiple accomplishments---Principal may revoke or cancel the power of attorney at any time unless it is with consideration. Head NotesCase Description

Mst. SHAHNAZ AKHTAR vs Syed EHSAN UR REHMAN S — 2022 SCMR 1398 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR