HC re­de­fines ‘agent’ for re­ceiv­ing public doc­u­ment

Consumer Voice - - In The News -

In a land­mark judge­ment, the Delhi high court has widened the scope of def­i­ni­tion of agent or rep­re­sen­ta­tive au­tho­rized to get the cer­ti­fied copy of a public doc­u­ment un­der the Reg­is­tra­tion Act, 1908. The court has held that an agent in­cludes an ‘in­ter­ested and ag­grieved per­son’.

Jus­tice Suresh Kait has ruled that there is no em­bargo un­der Sec­tion 57(3) of the Reg­is­tra­tion Act on sup­ply­ing the copy of a public doc­u­ment in favour of any in­ter­ested per­son.

The rul­ing will pro­vide re­lief to peo­ple who buy prop­erty from hold­ers of power of at­tor­ney but are later un­able to prove the trans­ac­tion when dis­pute arises or the owner of prop­erty re­pu­di­ates the sale agree­ment.

The verdict came on a writ pe­ti­tion moved by Delhi res­i­dent Za­rina Sid­diqui, who had bought a house in Ban­ga­lore from R Vish­wanathan hold­ing a gen­eral power of at­tor­ney is­sued by his brother A Ra­ma­lingam. Though the pe­ti­tioner is in pos­ses­sion of the prop­erty, Mr Vish­wanathan died be­fore the sale deed could be ex­e­cuted.

Mr Ra­ma­lingam later stated that the pow­ers held with Mr Vish­wanathan were limited to look­ing af­ter his share in the prop­erty and re­pu­di­ated the sale agree­ment. Ms Sid­diqui then ap­proached the sub­reg­is­trar, District Cen­tral, New Delhi, through her lawyer seek­ing a copy of the power of at­tor­ney ex­e­cuted in favour of Mr Vish­wanathan. The sub-reg­is­trar had re­fused to sup­ply the copy.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.