Friday, 30 October, 2009

Power-of-Attorney For Registration Documents

Power-of-Attorney For Registration Documents

Section 32 of the Indian Registration Act requires that documents meant for registration are to be presented for the said purpose at the proper registration office. Documents are some times executed and signed by the power-of-attorney agents of the concerned principals and the same power-of-attorney agents present such documents for registration. On the other hand law permits a person to execute and sign documents personally and delegate an agent for presenting such documents for registration. In the first instance execution and registration of the document are by the same person – the duly authorized agent. In the second case, execution of documents is by the author of the document personally but the registration process is completed by an agent. In both cases authority is to be delegated by a duly executed power-of-attorney.

Now the question arose whether power-of-attorneys issued for the purpose of executing and registering documents are to be registered compulsorily. The Hon. Supreme Court of India in the judgment delivered in C A No.xxxx/2004 ( Rajni T Vs Dulal R G) decided on 29th July 2009 has finally resolved the said issue.

Hon. Supreme Court has made a distinction between the Power-of-attorney meant for execution and registration of documents and the power-of-attorney meant only for registration of documents already executed and signed by its maker and has made it clear that power-of-attorneys of the first category need not compulsorily be registered while power-of-attorneys of the second category are to be registered compulsorily.

***********************

Plea of Cruelty in Matrimonial Cases

Plea of Cruelty in Matrimonial Cases .

    …unsubstantiated allegations of unchaste and adulterous behaviour by a husband against the wife in the Indian context do amount to matrimonial cruelty”

An India lady (wife) working abroad* approached Family Court in India seeking dissolution of marriage with her husband who also is in the same country*. The parties had contracted marriage in India according to Christian Rites.

Wife had made specific allegations of infliction of physical cruelty consequent to allegations of unchaste and adulterous behaviour. The wife alleged that the husband was making reckless allegations of pre-marital licentious behaviour and post marital adulterous and unchaste behaviour. The wife had been compelled and driven to courts in Switzerland to seek separation and police protection to save herself from the matrimonial cruelty allegedly heaped on her by her husband. Finally the wife approached Family Court in India seeking dissolution of marriage.

Husband also entered appearance before the family court opposing dissolution of marriage but at the same time repeating the allegations against the wife. However the husband could not substantiate his allegations before the Family Court. Even in Court the husband continued to make assertions of such licentious behaviour pre-marital and post-marital on the part of the wife ; but he did not even attempt to substantiate those allegations before court.

Family Court came to the conclusion that except the vague allegations of the husband there was absolutely nothing even to indicate, suggest or probabilise such allegations of improper marital conduct and behaviour on the part of the wife. The view taken by the Court was that unsubstantiated allegations of unchaste and adulterous behaviour by a husband against the wife in the Indian context do amount to matrimonial cruelty and dissolution of marriage under S.10 of the Indian Divorce Act was allowed.. The view taken by the Family Court was confirmed by the Hon.High Court of Kerala also. Cfr., 2009 (3) KLT 786.

Google
Copyright 2007 Mathew Associates. All Rights Reserved. Kerala Law K M Mathew

Disclaimer:
legal information is not the same as legal advice -- the application of law to an individual's specific circumstances. Although we go to great lengths to make sure our information is accurate and useful, we recommend you consult a lawyer if you want professional assurance that our information, and your interpretation of it, is appropriate to your particular situation.