Puran Chand (since deceased) through LRs Puran Chand (since deceased) through LRs v. CORAM : HON’BLE
Case Details
RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -1- - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH -.- RSA RSA-2784-2019 (O&M) Reserved on: Reserved on:- 29.10.2025 Date of Decision :04.11.2025 Date of Decision : Puran Chand (since deceased) through LRs Puran Chand (since deceased) through LRs ....Appellants Sandeep Kumar and Another Sandeep Kumar and Another ....Respondents VERSUS CORAM : HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Present: Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate and Ms. Ekta Thakur, Advocate and Ms. Sakshi Sharma, Advocate for the appellants. Ms. Sakshi Sharma, Advocate for the appellants Ms. Sakshi Sharma, Advocate for the appellants Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Aayush Bansal, Advocate for the respondents. Mr. Aayush Bansal, Advocate for the respondents. Mr. Aayush Bansal, Advocate for the respondents. -.- MANDEEP PANNU, J. MANDEEP PANNU, 1. The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant– The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant The present Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the appellant plaintiff, Puran Chand, assailing the concurrent findings of the learned Court plaintiff, Puran Chand, assailing the concurrent findings of the learned plaintiff, Puran Chand, assailing the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below. The trial Court, vide its judgment and decree dated below. The trial , dismissed , vide its judgment and decree dated 03.07.2015, dismissed the suit filed by the plaintiff and allowed the counter the suit filed by the plainti claim filed by the defendants. ff and allowed the counter-claim filed by the defendants. also The appeal preferred by the plaintiff before the learned Lower Appellate Court also The appeal preferred by the plaintiff before the learned Lower Appellate The appeal preferred by the plaintiff before the learned Lower Appellate . Aggrieved came to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 09.05.2019. Aggrieved came to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated came to be dismissed vide judgment and decree dated peal has been preferred. therefrom, the present Regular Second Appeal has been preferred. therefrom, the present Regular Second Ap Brief Facts 2. The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that he is in lawful The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that he is in lawful The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that he is in lawful The case of the plaintiff, as pleaded in the plaint, is that he is in lawful A, Chandigarh, since June 1997. and legal possession of house No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, since June 1997. and legal possession of house No. 222, Sector 44 and legal possession of house No. 222, Sector 44 He asserts that he purchased the said single-storey house He asserts that he purchased the said single through indirect sale storey house through indirect sale documents, including an affidavit, and has been in continuous peaceful possession documents, including an affidavit, and has been in continuous peaceful possession documents, including an affidavit, and has been in continuous peaceful possession documents, including an affidavit, and has been in continuous peaceful possession TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -2- - ever since. The plaintiff avers that he constructed the first and second floors of the ever since. The plaintiff avers that he constructed the first and second floors of the ever since. The plaintiff avers that he constructed the first and second floors of the ever since. The plaintiff avers that he constructed the first and second floors of the said house from his hard-earned money and with the assistance of said house from his hard a loan taken by earned money and with the assistance of a loan taken by It is further pleaded his daughter, Smt. Anu Bala, who is now married and settled. It is further pleaded his daughter, Smt. Anu Bala, who is now married and settled. his daughter, Smt. Anu Bala, who is now married and settled. General Power of Attorney in favour of defendant that the plaintiff executed a Sub-General Power of Attorney in favour of defendant General Power of Attorney in favour of defendant that the plaintiff executed a Sub official No.1, Sandeep Kumar, his son, only for a limited purpose of dealing with official No.1, Sandeep Kumar, his son, only for a limited purpose of dealing with No.1, Sandeep Kumar, his son, only for a limited purpose of dealing with matters pertaining to electricity, water, the Estate Office, and the Chandigarh matters pertaining to electricity, water, the Estate Office, and the Chandigarh matters pertaining to electricity, water, the Estate Office, and the Chandigarh matters pertaining to electricity, water, the Estate Office, and the Chandigarh Housing Board. The plaintiff contends that the said Power of Attorney was never Housing Board. The plaintiff contends that the said Power of Attorney was never Housing Board. The plaintiff contends that the said Power of Attorney was never Housing Board. The plaintiff contends that the said Power of Attorney was never intended to confer ownership rights upon the defendant. It is alleged that the intended to confer ownership rights upon the defendant. It is alleged that the intended to confer ownership rights upon the defendant. It is alleged that the intended to confer ownership rights upon the defendant. It is alleged that the law of defendant No.1, namely Anurag Sandal, a person of criminal brother-in-law of defendant No.1, namely Anurag Sandal, a person of criminal law of defendant No.1, namely Anurag Sandal, a person of criminal law of defendant No.1, namely Anurag Sandal, a person of criminal background allegedly involved in a bank dacoity, has been threatening the plaintiff background allegedly involved in a bank dacoity, has been threatening the plaintiff background allegedly involved in a bank dacoity, has been threatening the plaintiff background allegedly involved in a bank dacoity, has been threatening the plaintiff to vacate the premises and hand over its possession. The plaintiff claims to have to vacate the premises and hand over its possession. The plaintiff claims to have to vacate the premises and hand over its possession. The plaintiff claims to have to vacate the premises and hand over its possession. The plaintiff claims to have to the defendants and Anurag Sandal not to interfere in his made several requests to the defendants and Anurag Sandal not to interfere in his to the defendants and Anurag Sandal not to interfere in his made several requests According to the plaintiff, the defendants, peaceful possession, but to no avail. According to the plaintiff, the defendants, According to the plaintiff, the defendants, peaceful possession, but to no avail. acting in connivance with police officials, lodged a false and frivolous complaint acting in connivance with police officials, lodged a false and frivolous complaint acting in connivance with police officials, lodged a false and frivolous complaint acting in connivance with police officials, lodged a false and frivolous complaint dated 21.03.2009 nt to dispossess the plaintiff illegally. It is also 21.03.2009, with an intent to dispossess the plaintiff illegally. It is also nt to dispossess the plaintiff illegally. It is also alleged that defendant No.1 and his associates have been continuously harassing alleged that defendant No.1 and his associates have been continuously harassing alleged that defendant No.1 and his associates have been continuously harassing alleged that defendant No.1 and his associates have been continuously harassing and pressuring the plaintiff to vacate the premises. The said acts compelled the and pressuring the plaintiff to vacate the premises. The said acts compelled the and pressuring the plaintiff to vacate the premises. The said acts compelled the and pressuring the plaintiff to vacate the premises. The said acts compelled the r permanent injunction, seeking to restrain plaintiff to institute the present suit for permanent injunction, seeking to restrain r permanent injunction, seeking to restrain plaintiff to institute the present suit fo the defendants, their agents, and family members from interfering with his peaceful the defendants, their agents, and family members from interfering with his peaceful the defendants, their agents, and family members from interfering with his peaceful the defendants, their agents, and family members from interfering with his peaceful The plaintiff further pleaded that he has been in open, possession of the house. The plaintiff further pleaded that he has been in open, The plaintiff further pleaded that he has been in open, possession of the house. e since 1997 and that the continuous, and peaceful possession of the house since 1997 and that the continuous, and peaceful possession of the hous continuous, and peaceful possession of the hous defendants have no right, title, or interest in the same. He maintains that the house defendants have no right, title, or interest in the same. He maintains that the house defendants have no right, title, or interest in the same. He maintains that the house defendants have no right, title, or interest in the same. He maintains that the house in question was purchased from the sale proceeds of his previously owned in question was purchased from the sale proceeds of his previously owned in question was purchased from the sale proceeds of his previously owned in question was purchased from the sale proceeds of his previously owned been property, being House No. 1099, Sector 11, Panchkula, which in turn had been property, being House No. 1099, Sector 11, Panchkula, which in turn had property, being House No. 1099, Sector 11, Panchkula, which in turn had marla house allotted to him at Phase 4, S.A.S. purchased by him after selling a 10-marla house allotted to him at Phase 4, S.A.S. marla house allotted to him at Phase 4, S.A.S. purchased by him after selling a 10 TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -3- - Nagar, Mohali. Thus, according to the plaintiff, the entire consideration for the Nagar, Mohali. Thus, according to the plaintiff, the entire consideration for the Nagar, Mohali. Thus, according to the plaintiff, the entire consideration for the Nagar, Mohali. Thus, according to the plaintiff, the entire consideration for the disputed property was paid by him, and the defendants have not contributed even a disputed property was paid by him, and the defendants have not contributed even a disputed property was paid by him, and the defendants have not contributed even a disputed property was paid by him, and the defendants have not contributed even a gle penny towards its purchase or construction. single penny towards its purchase or construction. gle penny towards its purchase or construction. 3. Upon notice, the defendants appeared and filed their written Upon notice, the defendants appeared and filed their written Upon notice, the defendants appeared and filed their written Upon notice, the defendants appeared and filed their written counter claim, controverting the averments of the plaintiff. The statement-cum-counter claim, controverting the averments of the plaintiff. The counter claim, controverting the averments of the plaintiff. The counter claim, controverting the averments of the plaintiff. The defendants submitted that the suit is not maintainable and that the plaintiff, a defendants submitted that the suit is not maintainable and that the plaintiff, a defendants submitted that the suit is not maintainable and that the plaintiff, a defendants submitted that the suit is not maintainable and that the plaintiff, a ly suppressed material facts and signed and practising advocate, has deliberately suppressed material facts and signed and ly suppressed material facts and signed and practising advocate, has deliberate . It is the categorical stand verified false pleadings with intent to mislead the Court. It is the categorical stand verified false pleadings with intent to mislead the verified false pleadings with intent to mislead the of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, that he is the exclusive and lawful owner of of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, that he is the exclusive and lawful owner of of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, that he is the exclusive and lawful owner of of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, that he is the exclusive and lawful owner of same for valuable consideration the property in question, having purchased the same for valuable consideration the property in question, having purchased the the property in question, having purchased the
Legal Reasoning
. It is settled law that a power of attorney, be it general or sub- considered. It is settled law that a power of attorney, be it general or sub . It is settled law that a power of attorney, be it general or sub power, cannot itself operate as a registered conveyance of immovable property so power, cannot itself operate as a registered conveyance of immovable property so power, cannot itself operate as a registered conveyance of immovable property so power, cannot itself operate as a registered conveyance of immovable property so as to vest absolute title in the attorney. The as to vest absolute title in the attorney of immovable property is transfer of immovable property is effected by a registered deed. That principle does not, however, answer the effected by a registered deed. That principle does not, however, answer the effected by a registered deed. That principle does not, however, answer the effected by a registered deed. That principle does not, however, answer the narrower question which the counter-claim raised and wh narrower question which the counter s below claim raised and which the Courts below namely, whether on the basis of the chain of instruments and the examined, namely, whether on the basis of the chain of instruments and the namely, whether on the basis of the chain of instruments and the namely, whether on the basis of the chain of instruments and the specific powers contained in ific powers contained in Ex.DX-36 the counter claimant had sufficient 36 the counter-claimant had sufficient authority to manage the property, to let it out, recover rents, and to institute authority to manage the property, to let it out, recover rents, and to institute authority to manage the property, to let it out, recover rents, and to institute authority to manage the property, to let it out, recover rents, and to institute proceedings for eviction of persons wrongfully occupying the premises. The trial proceedings for eviction of persons wrongfully occupying the premises. The trial proceedings for eviction of persons wrongfully occupying the premises. The trial proceedings for eviction of persons wrongfully occupying the premises. The trial Court and the Appellate and the Appellate Court carefully read clause 6 of Ex. 36 and found that carefully read clause 6 of Ex.DX-36 and found that GPA while it did not purport to create title, it did expressly empower the Sub-GPA while it did not purport to create title, it did expressly empower the Sub while it did not purport to create title, it did expressly empower the Sub holder to initiate legal proceedings for recovery of possession and rent. On the holder to initiate legal proceedings for recovery of possession and rent. On the holder to initiate legal proceedings for recovery of possession and rent. On the holder to initiate legal proceedings for recovery of possession and rent. On the record before this Court, low were justified in distinguishing the this Court, the Courts below were justified in distinguishing the low were justified in distinguishing the abstract principle that a power of attorney does not confer title from the narrower abstract principle that a power of attorney does not confer title from the narrower abstract principle that a power of attorney does not confer title from the narrower abstract principle that a power of attorney does not confer title from the narrower rule that a person clothed with authority under a valid power may, in the exercise rule that a person clothed with authority under a valid power may, in the exercise rule that a person clothed with authority under a valid power may, in the exercise rule that a person clothed with authority under a valid power may, in the exercise o recover possession and mesne of those specific powers, maintain proceedings to recover possession and mesne of those specific powers, maintain proceedings t of those specific powers, maintain proceedings t profits on behalf of the principal. This Court concur profits on behalf of the principal. with that approach because it concurs with that approach because it respects both the settled principle regarding transfer of title and the agency law respects both the settled principle regarding transfer of title and the agency law respects both the settled principle regarding transfer of title and the agency law respects both the settled principle regarding transfer of title and the agency law principle that an agent may enforce the specific powers delegated to him on behalf principle that an agent may enforce the specific powers delegated to him on behalf principle that an agent may enforce the specific powers delegated to him on behalf principle that an agent may enforce the specific powers delegated to him on behalf of the principal. The relief granted in the counter of the principal as for possession and he relief granted in the counter-claim was for possession and mesne profits and not for declaration of title in the Sub-GPA holder’s favour. mesne profits and not for declaration of title in the Sub mesne profits and not for declaration of title in the Sub TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -20- - 38. The appellant further argued that even on the agency point the Sub- The appellant further argued that even on the agency point the Sub The appellant further argued that even on the agency point the Sub The appellant further argued that even on the agency point the Sub GPA relied upon by the respondent was vitiated and could not be acted upon GPA relied upon by the respondent was vitiated and could not be acted upon GPA relied upon by the respondent was vitiated and could not be acted upon GPA relied upon by the respondent was vitiated and could not be acted upon the chain of title and the antecedent instruments show cancellation and because the chain of title and the antecedent instruments show cancellation and the chain of title and the antecedent instruments show cancellation and the chain of title and the antecedent instruments show cancellation and inconsistent transactions, and because material original documents were not inconsistent transactions, and because material original documents were not inconsistent transactions, and because material original documents were not inconsistent transactions, and because material original documents were not produced. 39. It is true that the existence of an unbroken chain of authority and the It is true that the existence of an unbroken chain of authority and the It is true that the existence of an unbroken chain of authority and the It is true that the existence of an unbroken chain of authority and the validity of antecedent instruments are fact-sensitive inquiries, validity of antecede s below sensitive inquiries, the Courts below 35 and the attendant evidence and examined Ex.DX-33, Ex.DX-34, Ex.DX-35 and the attendant evidence and 35 and the attendant evidence and examined Ex.DX GPA in favour of Sandeep Kumar was reached concurrent findings that the Sub-GPA in favour of Sandeep Kumar was GPA in favour of Sandeep Kumar was reached concurrent findings that the Sub rior to his institution of the subsisting and had not been effectively revoked prior to his institution of the subsisting and had not been effectively revoked p subsisting and had not been effectively revoked p GPAs claim. The argument that cancellation of some antecedent Sub-GPAs claim. The argument that cancellation of some a counter-claim. The argument that cancellation of some a rendered Ex.DX 36 a nullity is answered by the fact that cancellation of a Sub- DX-36 a nullity is answered by the fact that cancellation of a Sub 36 a nullity is answered by the fact that cancellation of a Sub GPA does not ipso facto ipso facto annul Sub-GPA executed subsequently by the compe tent GPA executed subsequently by the competent holding authority unless there is specific proof that the later instrument was GPA-holding authority unless there is specific proof that the later instrument was holding authority unless there is specific proof that the later instrument was holding authority unless there is specific proof that the later instrument was 36 rested itself revoked. The burden to prove revocation or invalidity of Ex.DX-36 rested itself revoked. The burden to prove revocation or invalidity of itself revoked. The burden to prove revocation or invalidity of n a careful reading of the record llant who asserted the contrary. On a careful reading of the record llant who asserted the contrary. O upon the appellant who asserted the contrary. O this Court finds that the appellant failed to lead positive and convincing evidence s that the appellant failed to lead positive and convincing evidence that the appellant failed to lead positive and convincing evidence 36 had been rescinded or that the person executing it lacked to show that Ex.DX-36 had been rescinded or that the person executing it lacked 36 had been rescinded or that the person executing it lacked to show that Ex.DX capacity. The mere pendency of other suits and the existence of litigation about the capacity. The mere pendency of other suits and the existence of litigation about the capacity. The mere pendency of other suits and the existence of litigation about the capacity. The mere pendency of other suits and the existence of litigation about the between different parties does not, without more, destroy the efficacy ultimate title between different parties does not, without more, destroy the efficacy between different parties does not, without more, destroy the efficacy between different parties does not, without more, destroy the efficacy of a power of attorney which on its face empowers the attorney to institute eviction of a power of attorney which on its face empowers the attorney to institute eviction of a power of attorney which on its face empowers the attorney to institute eviction of a power of attorney which on its face empowers the attorney to institute eviction s below therefore rightly held that the proceedings and to recover rents. The Courts below therefore rightly held that the s below therefore rightly held that the proceedings and to recover rents. The Sub-GPA had, for claim, sufficient operative effect. GPA had, for the purposes of the counter-claim, sufficient operative effect. 40. ounsel for the appellant that the appellant The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant ounsel for the appellant that the appellant The contention of learned c had paid the full consideration and had become owner by purchase from one had paid the full consideration and had become owner by purchase from one had paid the full consideration and had become owner by purchase from one had paid the full consideration and had become owner by purchase from one TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -21- - Gurdial Singh Dhillon in 1997 and that he had constructed the first and second Singh Dhillon in 1997 and that he had constructed the first and second had constructed the first and second therefore his possession was that of an owner and could not floors at his own cost, therefore his possession was that of an owner and could not therefore his possession was that of an owner and could not floors at his own cost be treated as permissive is devoid of any force be treated as permissive . The appellant relies on affidavits is devoid of any force. The appellant relies on affidavits ip claim. That contention runs and indirect sale documents to support his ownership claim. That contention runs and indirect sale documents to support his ownersh and indirect sale documents to support his ownersh into significant evidentiary difficulties on this record. Under Section 54 of the into significant evidentiary difficulties on this record. Under Section 54 of the into significant evidentiary difficulties on this record. Under Section 54 of the into significant evidentiary difficulties on this record. Under Section 54 of the cted by a Transfer of Property Act a sale of immovable property must be effected by a Transfer of Property Act a sale of immovable property must be effe Transfer of Property Act a sale of immovable property must be effe registered instrument, the mere existence of affidavits, unregister registered instrument, ed or indirect the mere existence of affidavits, unregistered or indirect s below placed documents and photocopies is insufficient to create title. The Courts below placed documents and photocopies is insufficient to create title. The documents and photocopies is insufficient to create title. The emphasis on the failure of the appellant to produce the original documents for emphasis on the failure of the appellant to produce the original documents for emphasis on the failure of the appellant to produce the original documents for emphasis on the failure of the appellant to produce the original documents for example Ex. P- and on the fact that the alleged vendor’s -178 and Ex.P-178/A and on the fact that the alleged vendor’s and on the fact that the alleged vendor’s davit and indirect documents were not executed in the form required by law to affidavit and indirect documents were not executed in the form required by law to davit and indirect documents were not executed in the form required by law to davit and indirect documents were not executed in the form required by law to transfer immovable property. In addition, the appellant himself withdrew his main transfer immovable property. In addition, the appellant himself withdrew his main transfer immovable property. In addition, the appellant himself withdrew his main transfer immovable property. In addition, the appellant himself withdrew his main suit for permanent injunction during the trial, which demonstrates that he could not suit for permanent injunction during the trial, which demonstrates that he could not suit for permanent injunction during the trial, which demonstrates that he could not suit for permanent injunction during the trial, which demonstrates that he could not wish to press an independent, affirmative claim to ownership at that or did not wish to press an independent, affirmative claim to ownership at that wish to press an independent, affirmative claim to ownership at that wish to press an independent, affirmative claim to ownership at that e continued only to contest the counter- stage. He continued only to contest the counter claim. Withdrawal of the main suit -claim. Withdrawal of the main suit is a relevant circumstance because it shows that the appellant had not established is a relevant circumstance because it shows that the appellant had not established is a relevant circumstance because it shows that the appellant had not established is a relevant circumstance because it shows that the appellant had not established his clear and legal r clear and legal right over the suit property. This Court finds no legal error in the over the suit property. This Court finds no legal error in the conclusion that the appellant’s evidence fell short of proving title conclusion that the appellant’s evide he appellate nce fell short of proving title. The appellate appreciation of the documentary evidence is sustainable and not vitiated Court’s re-appreciation of the documentary evidence is sustainable and not vitiated appreciation of the documentary evidence is sustainable and not vitiated appreciation of the documentary evidence is sustainable and not vitiated by perversity. 41. It was further argued on behalf of It was on behalf of the appellant that the lower Court Courts wrongly placed the burden of proof upon him and relieved the respondent of wrongly placed the burden of proof upon him and relieved the respondent of wrongly placed the burden of proof upon him and relieved the respondent of wrongly placed the burden of proof upon him and relieved the respondent of proving owner-ship or the right to possession. A careful reading of the trial and proving owner-ship or the right to possession. A careful reading of the trial and proving owner-ship or the right to possession. A careful reading of the trial and proving owner-ship or the right to possession. A careful reading of the trial and s below correctly stated and applied the appellate judgments shows that the Courts below correctly stated and applied the s below correctly stated and applied the appellate judgments shows t rule on burden. When a party asserts a right to possession based on a power of rule on burden. When a party asserts a right to possession based on a power of rule on burden. When a party asserts a right to possession based on a power of rule on burden. When a party asserts a right to possession based on a power of TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -22- - enables him to claim attorney he must establish the particular authority which enables him to claim attorney he must establish the particular authority which attorney he must establish the particular authority which possession, once once the respondent produced Ex.DX 36 and relied upon clause 6 to DX-36 and relied upon clause 6 to show that he was empowered to recover possession and rents, the burden shifted to show that he was empowered to recover possession and rents, the burden shifted to show that he was empowered to recover possession and rents, the burden shifted to show that he was empowered to recover possession and rents, the burden shifted to GPA was not operative or that the appellant’s the appellant to show that the Sub-GPA was not operative or that the appellant’s GPA was not operative or that the appellant’s the appellant to show that the Sub ilure to produce original possession was supported by valid title. The appellant’s failure to produce original possession was supported by valid title. The appellant’s fa possession was supported by valid title. The appellant’s fa title documents, his withdrawal of the main suit and the absence of concrete title documents, his withdrawal of the main suit and the absence of concrete title documents, his withdrawal of the main suit and the absence of concrete title documents, his withdrawal of the main suit and the absence of concrete evidence of payment and registered conveyance meant that he did not meet that evidence of payment and registered conveyance meant that he did not meet that evidence of payment and registered conveyance meant that he did not meet that evidence of payment and registered conveyance meant that he did not meet that burden. In other words, the Courts below did not invert the burden burden. In other words, the quired s below did not invert the burden, they required each party to prove the facts that buttressed his asserted legal position each party to prove the facts that buttres sed his asserted legal position. T . The GPA with eviction powers and the appellant respondent proved a subsisting Sub-GPA with eviction powers and the appellant GPA with eviction powers and the appellant respondent proved a subsisting Sub failed to prove a registered transfer of title. failed to prove a registered transfer of title. 42. The appellant’s counsel fiercely attacked the quantum of mesne The appellant’s counsel fiercely attacked the quantum of mesne The appellant’s counsel fiercely attacked the quantum of mesne The appellant’s counsel fiercely attacked the quantum of mesne ₹25,000 per month, contending that no profits and the assessment of damages at ₹25,000 per month, contending that no ₹25,000 per month, contending that no profits and the assessment of damages at erred in awarding mesne evidence supported that figure and that the trial Court erred in awarding mesne evidence supported that figure and that the trial evidence supported that figure and that the trial expressly found that the defendants had profits from 15.04.2009. The trial Court expressly found that the defendants had expressly found that the defendants had profits from 15.04.2009. The trial ₹40,000 per month claimed in the counter- not proved the extravagant figure of ₹40,000 per month claimed in the counter ₹40,000 per month claimed in the counter not proved the extravagant figure of claim and that evidence on record supported a lower but reasonably assessed sum. claim and that evidence on record supported a lower but reasonably assessed sum. claim and that evidence on record supported a lower but reasonably assessed sum. claim and that evidence on record supported a lower but reasonably assessed sum. Assessment of mesne profits is a fact-intensive ex Assessment of mesne profi s below intensive exercise, the Courts below examined evidence of market rent for similar accommodation in the vicinity and examined evidence of market rent for similar accommodation in the vicinity and examined evidence of market rent for similar accommodation in the vicinity and examined evidence of market rent for similar accommodation in the vicinity and ₹25,000 per month. applied principled exercise of judicial discretion to arrive at ₹25,000 per month. applied principled exercise of judicial discretion to arrive at applied principled exercise of judicial discretion to arrive at ard is justified There is no mathematical or legal perversity in that approach, the award is justified There is no mathematical or legal perversity in that approach There is no mathematical or legal perversity in that approach by the contemporaneous evidence on rent in the locality and by the absence of any by the contemporaneous evidence on rent in the locality and by the absence of any by the contemporaneous evidence on rent in the locality and by the absence of any by the contemporaneous evidence on rent in the locality and by the absence of any precise or reliable rent-agreement establishing the higher figure. The trial precise or reliable rent agreement establishing the higher figure. The trial Court Court’s computation from 15.04.2009, the date specified in the terminatio computation from 15.04.2009 e given to the date specified in the termination notice given to TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -23- - the appellant, is consistent with the pleadings and the evidence about the is consistent with the pleadings and the evidence about the is consistent with the pleadings and the evidence about the termination of possession and is therefore sustainable. termination of possession and is therefore sustainable. termination of possession and is therefore sustainable. 43. The appellant further submitted that the relationship between the The appellant further submitted that the relationship between the The appellant further submitted that the relationship between the The appellant further submitted that the relationship between the parties was that of owner and occupier and not of licensor parties was that of owner and occupier and ensee, and that even if not of licensor-licensee, and that even if e existed it could not be terminated to the detriment of the appellant’s heirs a licence existed it could not be terminated to the detriment of the appellant’s heirs e existed it could not be terminated to the detriment of the appellant’s heirs e existed it could not be terminated to the detriment of the appellant’s heirs on the death of the original licensor. The law is clear that a licenc on the death of the original licensor e is a personal . The law is clear that a licence is a personal e an interest in the land and ordinarily and permissive right which does not create an interest in the land and ordinarily e an interest in the land and ordinarily and permissive right which does not creat terminates with the death of the licensor unless there are circumstances showing an terminates with the death of the licensor unless there are circumstances showing an terminates with the death of the licensor unless there are circumstances showing an terminates with the death of the licensor unless there are circumstances showing an intention that the licence should survive. On the facts the trial and appellate intention that the licen e should survive. On the facts the trial and appellate Court Courts ccupy the ground floor as a licensee by recorded that the appellant was allowed to occupy the ground floor as a licensee by ccupy the ground floor as a licensee by recorded that the appellant was allowed to o the owners and their agents and that the license was terminated by notice dated the owners and their agents and that the license was terminated by notice dated the owners and their agents and that the license was terminated by notice dated the owners and their agents and that the license was terminated by notice dated 30.03.2009 with effect from 15.04.2009. The appellant’s contention that he 30.03.2009 with effect from 15.04.2009. The appellant’s contention that he 30.03.2009 with effect from 15.04.2009. The appellant’s contention that he 30.03.2009 with effect from 15.04.2009. The appellant’s contention that he earlier. The personal enjoyed ownership rights was rejected for the reasons stated earlier. The personal enjoyed ownership rights was rejected for the reasons stated enjoyed ownership rights was rejected for the reasons stated e and its termination upon death of the licensor are legal nature of a licence and its termination upon death of the licensor are legal e and its termination upon death of the licensor are legal nature of a licen as here, principles that operate where indeed the licensor was the true owner, whereas here, principles that operate where indeed the licensor was th principles that operate where indeed the licensor was th the person asserting ownership itself failed to produce registered title, the person asserting ownership itself failed to produce registered title the person asserting ownership itself failed to produce registered title the e survived as a proprietary right is without substance. In contention that the licence survived as a proprietary right is without substance. In e survived as a proprietary right is without substance. In contention that the licenc any event, the Court s below have considered the question of survival of licence s below have considered the question of survival of licen Courts below have considered the question of survival of licen upon death and have correctly applied the legal test to the material facts before upon death and have correctly applied the legal test to the material facts before upon death and have correctly applied the legal test to the material facts before upon death and have correctly applied the legal test to the material facts before them. There is no reason for this to substitute its view. here is no reason for this Court to substitute its view. 44. Learned counsel for the appellant also Learned counsel for the appellant raised specific objections to the also raised specific objections to the admissibility and probative value of certain documents, admissibility and probat in particular photocopies ive value of certain documents, in particular photocopies on behalf of the appellant and relied upon of affidavits and receipts exhibited on behalf of the appellant and relied upon on behalf of the appellant and relied upon of affidavits and receipts exhibited and the Lower Appellate allegations of forgery and fabrication. The trial Court and the Lower Appellate allegations of forgery and fabrication. The trial allegations of forgery and fabrication. The trial Court examined those allegations t is axiomatic that allegations of forgery require examined those allegations. It is axiomatic that allegations of forgery require t is axiomatic that allegations of forgery require TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -24- - robust proof and, normally, the production of originals or appropriate secondary robust proof and, normally, the production of originals or appropriate secondary robust proof and, normally, the production of originals or appropriate secondary robust proof and, normally, the production of originals or appropriate secondary evidence. The appellant’s failure to produce the originals of Ex. evidence. The appellant’s failure 178A and to produce the originals of Ex.P-178/P-178A and s below were other crucial documents substantially weakened his case. The Courts below were other crucial documents substantially weakened his case. The other crucial documents substantially weakened his case. The tach little weight to mere photocopies in the absence of satisfactory entitled to attach little weight to mere photocopies in the absence of satisfactory tach little weight to mere photocopies in the absence of satisfactory tach little weight to mere photocopies in the absence of satisfactory production. Further, where the record contains instances of explanation for non-production. Further, where the record contains instances of production. Further, where the record contains instances of explanation for non must sift the evidence conflicting litigations and criminal complaints, the Court must sift the evidence conflicting litigations and criminal complaints, the conflicting litigations and criminal complaints, the and accept what is proved on preponderance. On this record and accept what is prove both the Courts below . On this record, both the Courts below insofar applied that approach and accepted the respondent’s documentary evidence insofar applied that approach and accepted the respondent’s documentary applied that approach and accepted the respondent’s documentary as it was sufficient to show a subsisting power to recover possession. T as it was sufficient to show a subsisting power to recover possession as it was sufficient to show a subsisting power to recover possession . The fied the rejection of his contrary appellant’s evidentiary shortcomings justified the rejection of his contrary fied the rejection of his contrary appellant’s evidentiary shortcomings justi narrative. 45. The appellant advanced a further legal proposition that even if the The appellant advanced a further legal proposition that even if the The appellant advanced a further legal proposition that even if the The appellant advanced a further legal proposition that even if the GPA holder could not recover GPA conferred eviction powers, the Sub-GPA holder could not recover GPA conferred eviction powers, the Sub Sub-GPA conferred eviction powers, the Sub possession from a person who had obtained ownership by adverse possession or possession from a person who had obtained ownership by adverse po possession from a person who had obtained ownership by adverse po ssession or by between strangers as to title could not a sale with registered deed, in short, that a lis between strangers as to title could not between strangers as to title could not a sale with registered deed, claim in the manner permitted. That submission be resolved by a counter-claim in the manner permitted. That submission claim in the manner permitted. That submission be resolved by a counter overlooks the procedural posture i.e. the appellant had instituted and later verlooks the procedural posture i.e. the appellant had instituted and later the appellant had instituted and later withdrawn his main injunctive suit. W hdrawn his main injunctive suit. What was before the trial was a counter- hat was before the trial Court was a counter claim by an authorised agent to recover possession from a person in unauthorised claim by an authorised agent to recover possession from a person in unauthorised claim by an authorised agent to recover possession from a person in unauthorised claim by an authorised agent to recover possession from a person in unauthorised occupation. The remedy sought and granted was possessory in nature and did not occupation. The remedy sought and granted was possessory in nature and did not occupation. The remedy sought and granted was possessory in nature and did not occupation. The remedy sought and granted was possessory in nature and did not n conclusively who the absolute owner was for all purposes. Where, adjudicate upon conclusively who the absolute owner was for all purposes. Where, n conclusively who the absolute owner was for all purposes. Where, n conclusively who the absolute owner was for all purposes. Where, as here, possession is permissive and the agent holds specific authority to eject, the as here, possession is permissive and the agent holds specific authority to eject, the as here, possession is permissive and the agent holds specific authority to eject, the as here, possession is permissive and the agent holds specific authority to eject, the claim for possession is maintainable even though the ultimate question of counter-claim for possession is maintainable even though the ultimate question of claim for possession is maintainable even though the ultimate question of claim for possession is maintainable even though the ultimate question of title may be the subject matter of a separate proceeding. The title may be the sub s below ject matter of a separate proceeding. The Courts below TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -25- - correctly confined their decree to possession and mesne profits and did not purport correctly confined their decree to possession and mesne profits and did not purport correctly confined their decree to possession and mesne profits and did not purport correctly confined their decree to possession and mesne profits and did not purport to decide title forever; that restraint is sound and conforms to settled procedure. to decide title forever; that restraint is sound and conforms to settled procedure. to decide title forever; that restraint is sound and conforms to settled procedure. 46. some fundamental illegality because The contention that there is some fundamental illegality because some fundamental illegality because The contention that there is concurrent findings are contradictory i.e., that the Courts below both held that concurrent findings are contradictory i.e., that the concurrent findings are contradictory i.e., that the s below both held that Ex.DX-36 did not convey title but 36 did not convey title but nevertheless allowed possession, nevertheless allowed possession, is, in view is, in view of s distinguished ownership , a misreading of the judgments. The Courts distinguished ownership , a misreading of the judgments. The this Court, a misreading of the judgments. The from authority to manage. A power of attorney may not create title yet it can from authority to manage. A power of attorney may not create title yet it can from authority to manage. A power of attorney may not create title yet it can from authority to manage. A power of attorney may not create title yet it can to evict unauthorised validly empower the attorney to manage the property and to evict unauthorised validly empower the attorney to manage the property and validly empower the attorney to manage the property and and is legally his distinction is at the heart of the concurrent findings and is legally his distinction is at the heart of the concurrent findings occupiers. This distinction is at the heart of the concurrent findings correct. The Court Courts below meticulously explained that the Sub GPA did not make s below meticulously explained that the Sub-GPA did not make sion on behalf the respondent the owner but it gave him authority to recover possession on behalf the respondent the owner but it gave him authority to recover posses the respondent the owner but it gave him authority to recover posses that is a legally coherent stance and not a contradiction. of the principal, that is a legally coherent stance and not a contradiction. of the principal, 47. I have also carefully considered the judgments cited by learned I have also carefully considered the judgments cited by learned I have also carefully considered the judgments cited by learned I have also carefully considered the judgments cited by learned mt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan & Ors. v. M. counsel for the appellant, namely Smt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan & Ors. v. M. mt. Kasthuri Radhakrishnan & Ors. v. M. counsel for the appellant, namely Chinniyan & Anr., 2016 AIR (SCW) 609, and Chinniyan & Anr., 2016 AIR (SCW) 60 Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. , and Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana & Another, 2011(4) RCR (Civil) 669 v. State of Haryana & Another, . There can be no quarrel 2011(4) RCR (Civil) 669. There can be no quarrel with the proposition of law laid down in those authorities that ownership of with the proposition of law laid down in those authorities that ownership of with the proposition of law laid down in those authorities that ownership of with the proposition of law laid down in those authorities that ownership of immovable property cannot be transferred or conveyed through an agreement to immovable property cannot be transferred or conveyed through an agreement to immovable property cannot be transferred or conveyed through an agreement to immovable property cannot be transferred or conveyed through an agreement to duly registered sale deed under sell, a will, or a power of attorney, and that only a duly registered sale deed under sell, a will, or a power of attorney, and that only a sell, a will, or a power of attorney, and that only a Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act can create or convey title. However, the Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act can create or convey title. However, the Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act can create or convey title. However, the Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act can create or convey title. However, the reliance placed on those authorities by the appellant is misplaced in the context of reliance placed on those authorities by the appellant is misplaced in the context of reliance placed on those authorities by the appellant is misplaced in the context of reliance placed on those authorities by the appellant is misplaced in the context of elow have not conferred the present case. The impugned decrees of the Courts below have not conferred the present case. The impugned decrees of the the present case. The impugned decrees of the ownership upon the respondent–counter claimant ownership upon the respondent s have counter claimant, rather, both Courts have categorically held that the Sub-General Power of Attorney (Ex.DX categorically held that the Sub 36) did not and General Power of Attorney (Ex.DX-36) did not and could not transfer ownership. The relief granted to the respondent was not could not transfer ownership. The relief granted to the respondent was not could not transfer ownership. The relief granted to the respondent was not could not transfer ownership. The relief granted to the respondent was not TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -26- - laration of ownership but recovery of possession and mesne profits in the declaration of ownership but recovery of possession and mesne profits in the laration of ownership but recovery of possession and mesne profits in the laration of ownership but recovery of possession and mesne profits in the GPA holder empowered under clause 6 to capacity of a duly authorized Sub-GPA holder empowered under clause 6 to GPA holder empowered under clause 6 to capacity of a duly authorized Sub manage the property and initiate eviction proceedings on behalf of the principal. manage the property and initiate eviction proceedings on behalf of the principal. manage the property and initiate eviction proceedings on behalf of the principal. manage the property and initiate eviction proceedings on behalf of the principal. Hence, the principle in Suraj Lamp (supra) and Kasthuri Radhakrishnan Hence, the principle in (supra) and Kasthuri Radhakrishnan (supra) t, if anything, reinforces the decisions does not advance the appellant’s case. It, if anything, reinforces the decisions does not advance the appellant’s case decisions does not advance the appellant’s case s below that title could not pass through GPA but that valid reasoning of the Courts below that title could not pass through GPA but that valid s below that title could not pass through GPA but that valid reasoning of the authority under the GPA could sustain the counter authority under the GPA could sustain the counter-claim. 48. On the other hand, the judgments cited by learned counsel for the On the other hand, the judgments cited by learned counsel for the On the other hand, the judgments cited by learned counsel for the On the other hand, the judgments cited by learned counsel for the Sunder Lal v. Hari Dass v. Sagar Chand, 2017(2) RCR (Civil) 80, Sunder Lal v. Hari Dass v. Sagar Chand, 2017(2) RCR (Civil) 80 respondent Hari Dass v. Sagar Chand, 2017(2) RCR (Civil) 80 Chinnan v. Ranjithammal, AIR 1931 Sita Bali, 2003(3) RCR (Civil) 243 and Chinnan v. Ranjithammal, AIR 1931 Chinnan v. Ranjithammal, AIR 1931 Sita Bali, 2003(3) RCR (Civil) 243 Mad 216, were aptly relied upon by the s below. These authorities uniformly , were aptly relied upon by the Courts below. These authorities uniformly s below. These authorities uniformly hold that a license is a mere personal permission, does not create any right or hold that a license is a mere personal permission, does not create any right or hold that a license is a mere personal permission, does not create any right or hold that a license is a mere personal permission, does not create any right or interest in property, and terminates on revocation or on the death of the licensor. interest in property, and terminates on revocation or on the death of the licensor. interest in property, and terminates on revocation or on the death of the licensor. interest in property, and terminates on revocation or on the death of the licensor. these authorities to the present facts is direct and justified, since The application of these authorities to the present facts is direct and justified, since these authorities to the present facts is direct and justified, since The application of the appellant was found to be in permissive possession and the license had been the appellant was found to be in permissive possession and the license had been the appellant was found to be in permissive possession and the license had been the appellant was found to be in permissive possession and the license had been terminated by notice dated 30.03.2009. The ratio of these cases, therefore, squarely terminated by notice dated 30.03.2009. The ratio of these cases, therefore, squarely terminated by notice dated 30.03.2009. The ratio of these cases, therefore, squarely terminated by notice dated 30.03.2009. The ratio of these cases, therefore, squarely s below. supports the concurrent findings of the Courts below. supports the concurr Conclusion 49.
Arguments
from the previous owner through a General Power of Attorney executed by Shri from the previous owner through a General Power of Attorney executed by Shri from the previous owner through a General Power of Attorney executed by Shri from the previous owner through a General Power of Attorney executed by Shri It is averred that the said Power of Om Prakash Sharma, the original owner. It is averred that the said Power of It is averred that the said Power of Om Prakash Sharma, the original owner. Attorney dated 22.04.1997 22.04.1997 was duly registered on e strength was duly registered on 27.05.1997, and on the strength thereof, the defendant got the property converted into freehold by the Estate thereof, the defendant got the property converted into freehold by the Estate thereof, the defendant got the property converted into freehold by the Estate thereof, the defendant got the property converted into freehold by the Estate Office, Chandigarh Administration, after paying all requisite conversion charges. It Office, Chandigarh Administration, after paying all requisite conversion charges. It Office, Chandigarh Administration, after paying all requisite conversion charges. It Office, Chandigarh Administration, after paying all requisite conversion charges. It is further pleaded that after purchasing the property, defendant No.1 renovated and is further pleaded that after purchasing the property, defendant No.1 renovated an is further pleaded that after purchasing the property, defendant No.1 renovated an is further pleaded that after purchasing the property, defendant No.1 renovated an furnished the house with expensive furniture, fixtures, and household articles furnished the house with expensive furniture, fixtures, and household articles furnished the house with expensive furniture, fixtures, and household articles furnished the house with expensive furniture, fixtures, and household articles including dining tables, steel almirahs, double beds, gas connection, washing including dining tables, steel almirahs, double beds, gas connection, washing including dining tables, steel almirahs, double beds, gas connection, washing including dining tables, steel almirahs, double beds, gas connection, washing The defendants assert machine, and other household effects, all purchased by him. The defendants assert machine, and other household effects, all purchased by him. machine, and other household effects, all purchased by him. that the plaintiff and his wife, Smt. Rat an Rani, being the biological parents of iff and his wife, Smt. Rattan Rani, being the biological parents of an Rani, being the biological parents of defendant No.1, were allowed to reside on the ground floor of the house merely as defendant No.1, were allowed to reside on the ground floor of the house merely as defendant No.1, were allowed to reside on the ground floor of the house merely as defendant No.1, were allowed to reside on the ground floor of the house merely as e fee, out of love and affection. It is alleged licencee, without payment of any licence fee, out of love and affection. It is alleged e fee, out of love and affection. It is alleged licencee, without payment of any licenc later started acting contrary to the interest of the defendant, began that the plaintiff later started acting contrary to the interest of the defendant, began later started acting contrary to the interest of the defendant, began that the plaintiff misappropriating rent from tenants on the upper floors, and even issued rent misappropriating rent from tenants on the upper floors, and even issued rent misappropriating rent from tenants on the upper floors, and even issued rent misappropriating rent from tenants on the upper floors, and even issued rent receipts in his own name by falsely claiming ownership. The defendants state that receipts in his own name by falsely claiming ownership. The defendants state that receipts in his own name by falsely claiming ownership. The defendants state that receipts in his own name by falsely claiming ownership. The defendants state that TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -4- - license was terminated vide notice dated 30.03. license was terminated vide 2009, granting the plaintiff time 30.03.2009, granting the plaintiff time 2009 to vacate the premises. Despite receipt of the said notice, the until 15.04.2009 to vacate the premises. Despite receipt of the said notice, the 2009 to vacate the premises. Despite receipt of the said notice, the 2009 to vacate the premises. Despite receipt of the said notice, the plaintiff neither vacated the premises nor paid any damages. plaintiff neither vacated the premises nor paid any damages. plaintiff neither vacated the premises nor paid any damages. 4. others, including It is also averred that the plaintiff, in collusion with others, including It is also averred that the plaintiff, in collusion with It is also averred that the plaintiff, in collusion with Ravi kant, Smt. Vijay Kumari, , and her husband Sushil Gupta, fabricated kant, Smt. Vijay Kumari, Anu Bala, and her husband Sushil Gupta, fabricated , and her husband Sushil Gupta, fabricated false documents and aided strangers in using the disputed property’s address for false documents and aided strangers in using the disputed property’s address for false documents and aided strangers in using the disputed property’s address for false documents and aided strangers in using the disputed property’s address for preparing forged documents. Defendant No.1 further alleged that on 21.03.20 preparing forged documents. Defendant No.1 further alleged that on preparing forged documents. Defendant No.1 further alleged that on 21.03.2009, the plaintiff and his associates created a situation of lawlessness and even assaulted the plaintiff and his associates created a situation of lawlessness and even assaulted the plaintiff and his associates created a situation of lawlessness and even assaulted the plaintiff and his associates created a situation of lawlessness and even assaulted The defendant Smt. Poonam Sandal, wife of defendant No.1, and their children. The defendant Smt. Poonam Sandal, wife of defendant No.1, and their children. Smt. Poonam Sandal, wife of defendant No.1, and their children. also averred that the plaintiff executed false rent documents with one Smt. also averred that the plaintiff executed false rent documents with one Smt. also averred that the plaintiff executed false rent documents with one Smt. also averred that the plaintiff executed false rent documents with one Smt. Gurvinder Kaur Sodhi on 2009, receiving substantial consideration from her aur Sodhi on 18.08.2009, receiving substantial consideration from her 2009, receiving substantial consideration from her by falsely representing himself as the landlord. When the said lady discovered the by falsely representing himself as the landlord. When the said lady discovered the by falsely representing himself as the landlord. When the said lady discovered the by falsely representing himself as the landlord. When the said lady discovered the real ownership, disputes arose, and the matter was reported to the police. It is real ownership, disputes arose, and the matter was reported to the police. It is real ownership, disputes arose, and the matter was reported to the police. It is real ownership, disputes arose, and the matter was reported to the police. It is he plaintiff has been retaining unlawful possession of the further alleged that the plaintiff has been retaining unlawful possession of the he plaintiff has been retaining unlawful possession of the further alleged that t house by exploiting his position as an advocate and a senior citizen. house by exploiting his position as an advocate and a senior citizen. house by exploiting his position as an advocate and a senior citizen. 5. claim, the defendants sought a decree for By way of counter-claim, the defendants sought a decree for claim, the defendants sought a decree for By way of counter iff and all persons possession by way of mandatory injunction, directing the plaintiff and all persons possession by way of mandatory injunction, directing the plaint possession by way of mandatory injunction, directing the plaint claiming under him to hand over vacant possession of the ground floor of House claiming under him to hand over vacant possession of the ground floor of House claiming under him to hand over vacant possession of the ground floor of House claiming under him to hand over vacant possession of the ground floor of House A, Chandigarh, and to remove all unauthorized occupants. The No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, and to remove all unauthorized occupants. The A, Chandigarh, and to remove all unauthorized occupants. The No. 222, Sector 44 defendants also claimed damages at the rate of ₹40,000 per month from 15 defendants also claimed damages at the rate of 009 ₹40,000 per month from 15.04.2009 till actual restoration of possession, asserting that similar properties in the vicinity till actual restoration of possession, asserting that similar properties in the vicinity till actual restoration of possession, asserting that similar properties in the vicinity till actual restoration of possession, asserting that similar properties in the vicinity fetch rent exceeding ₹40,000 per month. fetch rent exceeding 6. The plaintiff filed a replication to the written statement and a reply to The plaintiff filed a replication to the written statement and a reply to The plaintiff filed a replication to the written statement and a reply to The plaintiff filed a replication to the written statement and a reply to claim, reiterating his ownership and denying all allegations made by the counter-claim, reiterating his ownership and denying all allegations made by claim, reiterating his ownership and denying all allegations made by claim, reiterating his ownership and denying all allegations made by the defendants. He refuted the assertion that defendant No.1 had purchased the the defendants. He refuted the assertion that defendant No.1 had purchased the the defendants. He refuted the assertion that defendant No.1 had purchased the the defendants. He refuted the assertion that defendant No.1 had purchased the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -5- - sideration, contending instead that the defendant was merely house for valuable consideration, contending instead that the defendant was merely sideration, contending instead that the defendant was merely house for valuable con General Power of Attorney issued in his favour for limited a holder of a Sub-General Power of Attorney issued in his favour for limited General Power of Attorney issued in his favour for limited a holder of a Sub The plaintiff elaborated that as per the records of the administrative purposes. The plaintiff elaborated that as per the records of the The plaintiff elaborated that as per the records of the administrative purposes. Estate Office, Chandigarh, plot No. 222, Sector 44 Estate Office, Chandigarh, plot No. 2 A, Chandigarh, was initially 22, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, was initially allotted to Shri Om Prakash Sharma, who had executed a General Power of allotted to Shri Om Prakash Sharma, who had executed a General Power of allotted to Shri Om Prakash Sharma, who had executed a General Power of allotted to Shri Om Prakash Sharma, who had executed a General Power of Attorney for management purposes in favour of Shri Ashwani Sabharwal and Shri Attorney for management purposes in favour of Shri Ashwani Sabharwal and Shri Attorney for management purposes in favour of Shri Ashwani Sabharwal and Shri Attorney for management purposes in favour of Shri Ashwani Sabharwal and Shri General Power Tarsem Sabharwal. Thereafter, Ashwani Sabharwal executed a Sub-General Power Tarsem Sabharwal. Thereafter, Ashwani Sabharwal executed a Sub Tarsem Sabharwal. Thereafter, Ashwani Sabharwal executed a Sub GPA in of Attorney in favour of Shri K.C. Arora, and subsequently another Sub-GPA in of Attorney in favour of Shri K.C. Arora, and subsequently another Sub of Attorney in favour of Shri K.C. Arora, and subsequently another Sub favour of Shri Gurdial Gurdial Singh Dhillon on 29.02. GPA in 29.02.1996. However, the Sub-GPA in favour of Gurdial Gurdial Singh Dhillon was cancelled on The plaintiff Singh Dhillon was cancelled on 27.05.1997. The plaintiff t Om Prakash Sharma had never conferred ownership rights upon any submitted that Om Prakash Sharma had never conferred ownership rights upon any t Om Prakash Sharma had never conferred ownership rights upon any t Om Prakash Sharma had never conferred ownership rights upon any GPA holders could not convey ownership beyond of his agents and that the Sub-GPA holders could not convey ownership beyond GPA holders could not convey ownership beyond of his agents and that the Sub Gurdial what was vested in the principal. It is the case of the plaintiff that Shri Gurdial what was vested in the principal. It is the case of the plaintiff that Shri what was vested in the principal. It is the case of the plaintiff that Shri storey building over the said plot and Singh Dhillon had constructed a three-storey building over the said plot and storey building over the said plot and Singh Dhillon had constructed thereafter sold the same to the plaintiff by way of an affidavit and other indirect thereafter sold the same to the plaintiff by way of an affidavit and other indirect thereafter sold the same to the plaintiff by way of an affidavit and other indirect thereafter sold the same to the plaintiff by way of an affidavit and other indirect documents, and handed over actual vacant physical possession along with all documents, and handed over actual vacant physical possession along with all documents, and handed over actual vacant physical possession along with all documents, and handed over actual vacant physical possession along with all iff, Shri Ashwani Sabharwal, who relevant papers. On the directions of the plaintiff, Shri Ashwani Sabharwal, who relevant papers. On the directions of the plaint relevant papers. On the directions of the plaint General Power was the original GPA holder of Om Prakash Sharma, issued a Sub-General Power was the original GPA holder of Om Prakash Sharma, issued a Sub was the original GPA holder of Om Prakash Sharma, issued a Sub of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, only to facilitate routine of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, only to facilitate routine of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, only to facilitate routine of Attorney in favour of defendant No.1, Sandeep Kumar, only to facilitate routine hip rights. It was dealings with government authorities and not to transfer ownership rights. It was dealings with government authorities and not to transfer owners dealings with government authorities and not to transfer owners Singh Dhillon would further agreed that neither Ashwani Sabharwal nor Gurdial Singh Dhillon would further agreed that neither Ashwani Sabharwal nor further agreed that neither Ashwani Sabharwal nor revoke the same, and the said arrangement was made only for administrative revoke the same, and the said arrangement was made only for administrative revoke the same, and the said arrangement was made only for administrative revoke the same, and the said arrangement was made only for administrative convenience. 7. The plaintiff emphasized that defendant No.1 was residing in The plaintiff emphasized that defendant No.1 was residing in The plaintiff emphasized that defendant No.1 was residing in The plaintiff emphasized that defendant No.1 was residing in D, Chandigarh, ment accommodation, namely House No. 3091, Sector 15-D, Chandigarh, ment accommodation, namely House No. 3091, Sector 15 government accommodation, namely House No. 3091, Sector 15 TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -6- - since 1994, and therefore could not have been the purchaser of the disputed since 1994, and therefore could not have been the purchaser of the disputed since 1994, and therefore could not have been the purchaser of the disputed since 1994, and therefore could not have been the purchaser of the disputed property in 1997. The plaintiff maintained that all sale considerations were paid by property in 1997. The plaintiff maintained that all sale considerations were paid by property in 1997. The plaintiff maintained that all sale considerations were paid by property in 1997. The plaintiff maintained that all sale considerations were paid by and from the sale proceeds of his previous properties him from his own resources and from the sale proceeds of his previous properties and from the sale proceeds of his previous properties him from his own resources at Mohali and Panchkula. He denied all allegations of misappropriation, forgery, at Mohali and Panchkula. He denied all allegations of misappropriation, forgery, at Mohali and Panchkula. He denied all allegations of misappropriation, forgery, at Mohali and Panchkula. He denied all allegations of misappropriation, forgery, and fabrication and asserted that he has been in continuous, peaceful, and lawful and fabrication and asserted that he has been in continuous, peaceful, and lawful and fabrication and asserted that he has been in continuous, peaceful, and lawful and fabrication and asserted that he has been in continuous, peaceful, and lawful It was accordingly prayed that the possession of the disputed house since 1997. It was accordingly prayed that the It was accordingly prayed that the possession of the disputed house since claim filed by the defendants be dismissed, and the decree for permanent counter-claim filed by the defendants be dismissed, and the decree for permanent claim filed by the defendants be dismissed, and the decree for permanent claim filed by the defendants be dismissed, and the decree for permanent injunction, as sought in the suit, be granted in favour of the plaintiff. injunction, as sought in the suit, be granted in favour of the plaintiff. injunction, as sought in the suit, be granted in favour of the plaintiff. 8. initially From the pleadings of the parties, the learned Trial Court initially From the pleadings of the parties, the learned Trial From the pleadings of the parties, the learned Trial framed the following issues for determination: framed the following issues for determination: 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of injunction as Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of injunction as Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of injunction as prayed for? — OPP prayed for? 2. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable? OPD 3 Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable? — OPD 3 3. Whether the defendant is entitled damages as claimed in Whether the defendant is entitled for the damages as claimed in the counter-claim? — OPD the counter 4. Whether the suit of the plaintiff has not been properly valued Whether the suit of the plaintiff has not been properly valued Whether the suit of the plaintiff has not been properly valued OPD for the purpose of Court fee? — OPD for the purpose of 5. Whether defendant No.1 has not come to the with clean Whether defendant No.1 has not come to the Court with clean hands? — OPP 6 hands? 6. Relief. 9. pendency of the case, when the matter was fixed for the During the pendency of the case, when the matter was fixed for the pendency of the case, when the matter was fixed for the During the plaintiff’s evidence and for consideration of an application under Order VII Rule plaintiff’s evidence and for consideration of an application under Order VII Rule plaintiff’s evidence and for consideration of an application under Order VII Rule plaintiff’s evidence and for consideration of an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the plaintiff, through a separate statement, withdrew the present suit, 11 CPC, the plaintiff, through a separate statement, withdrew the present suit, 11 CPC, the plaintiff, through a separate statement, withdrew the present suit, 11 CPC, the plaintiff, through a separate statement, withdrew the present suit, which was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. which was accordingly dismissed as wit owever, since the defendant had hdrawn. However, since the defendant had claim, an application for recasting of issues was moved, already filed a counter-claim, an application for recasting of issues was moved, claim, an application for recasting of issues was moved, already filed a counter TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -7- - which was allowed by the learned Trial Court which was allowed by the learned Trial . Consequently, the issues framed Court. Consequently, the issues framed earlier on 25.08. 25.08. 2010 were recalled, and the following issues were reframed on 2010 were recalled, and the following issues were reframed on 25.04.2013 and again on 2013 and again on 03.07.2015: 1. Whether the plaintiff is liable to hand over the vacant possession the plaintiff is liable to handover the vacant possession A, Chandigarh, along of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, along of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 up in the with other persons brought by him, and also damages as set up in the with other persons brought by him, and also damages as set with other persons brought by him, and also damages as set counter-claim? — OPD counter 2. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable? OPD Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable? — OPD 3. Relief. 10. In order to prove his case, the plaintiff, Puran Chand, himself stepped In order to prove his case, the plaintiff, Puran Chand, himself stepped In order to prove his case, the plaintiff, Puran Chand, himself stepped In order to prove his case, the plaintiff, Puran Chand, himself stepped into the witness box as PW-1 and tendered into evidence his duly sworn a into the witness box as PW ffidavit 1 and tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit 1/A, wherein he reiterated the contents of the plaint and substantiated his Ex. PW-1/A, wherein he reiterated the contents of the plaint and substantiated his 1/A, wherein he reiterated the contents of the plaint and substantiated his 1/A, wherein he reiterated the contents of the plaint and substantiated his ownership and possession over the suit property. For the sake of brevity, the entire ownership and possession over the suit property. For the sake of brevity, the entire ownership and possession over the suit property. For the sake of brevity, the entire ownership and possession over the suit property. For the sake of brevity, the entire contents of the affidavit are not reproduced herein. In support of his case, the contents of the affidavit are not reproduced herein. In support of his case, th contents of the affidavit are not reproduced herein. In support of his case, th contents of the affidavit are not reproduced herein. In support of his case, th plaintiff proved on record the following documents: plaintiff proved on record the following documents: plaintiff proved on record the following documents: i) , including the affidavit, documents of Ex. P-1 to Ex. P-7, including the affidavit, documents of , including the affidavit, documents of title/affidavit of purchase, copy of the passbook, copy of demand title/affidavit of purchase, copy of the passbook, copy of demand title/affidavit of purchase, copy of the passbook, copy of demand title/affidavit of purchase, copy of the passbook, copy of demand draft, and other related papers; draft, and other related papers; ii) Ex. P-8 to Ex. P-214, comprising bills and receipts relating to 214, comprising bills and receipts relating to construction and renovation; and construction and renovation; and iii) Affidavits Ex. P-223 and Ex. P 224, establishing his possession 223 and Ex. P-224, establishing his possession and ownership claim. and ownership claim. 2, Sanjay Gupta, who tendered into The plaintiff also examined PW-2, Sanjay Gupta, who tendered into 2, Sanjay Gupta, who tendered into The plaintiff also examined PW evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. PW- evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. P 2/A, corroborating the plaintiff’s -2/A, corroborating the plaintiff’s version. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the plaintiff closed the evidence. version. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the plaintiff closed the evidence. version. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the plaintiff closed the evidence. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -8- - 11. claim, defendant On the other hand, to prove the defence and counter-claim, defendant On the other hand, to prove the defence and counter On the other hand, to prove the defence and counter 1 and claimant Sandeep Kumar entered into the witness box as DW-1 and claimant Sandeep Kumar entered into the witness bo No.1 / counter-claimant Sandeep Kumar entered into the witness bo 1/A, wherein he tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. DW-1/A, wherein he tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. DW tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. DW claim. For reaffirmed the entire case set up in the written statement and counter-claim. For reaffirmed the entire case set up in the written statement and counter reaffirmed the entire case set up in the written statement and counter conciseness, the detailed contents of the affidavit have not been reproduced herein. conciseness, the detailed contents of the affidavit have not been reproduced herein. conciseness, the detailed contents of the affidavit have not been reproduced herein. conciseness, the detailed contents of the affidavit have not been reproduced herein. upport of his case, the defendant produced and tendered into evidence the In support of his case, the defendant produced and tendered into evidence the upport of his case, the defendant produced and tendered into evidence the upport of his case, the defendant produced and tendered into evidence the following documents: Ex. DW ocuments: Ex. DW-x/1 to Ex. DW /14, which included the General x/1 to Ex. DW-x/14, which included the General General Power of Attorney, conversion and freehold Power of Attorney, Sub-General Power of Attorney, conversion and freehold General Power of Attorney, conversion and freehold Power of Attorney, Sub documents, payment receipts, and other supporting papers. documents, payment receipts, and The defendant further other supporting papers. The defendant further examined the following witnesses: examined the following witnesses: i) 2 Smt. Balwinder Kaur, DW-2 Smt. Balwinder Kaur, ii) DW-3 Satish Kumar, iii) DW-4 Sanjay Vats, iv) DW-5 Neeraj Kumar, v) DW-6 Satish Kumar, vi) DW-7 Harjinder Singh, and vii) DW-8 Sanjeev Kumar. vii) Thereafter, the learned counsel for the defendant closed the evidence. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the defendant closed the evidence. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the defendant closed the evidence. Thereafter, the learned counsel for the defendant closed the evidence. Findings of the trial Court Findings of the trial 12. observed that the After hearing both sides, the learned trial Court observed that the After hearing both sides, the learned trial After hearing both sides, the learned trial counter-claimant’s claim was two firstly as an owner and secondly as a Sub- claimant’s claim was two-fold—firstly as an owner and secondly as a Sub firstly as an owner and secondly as a Sub A holder. It was, however, admitted that there existed no registered sale deed GPA holder. It was, however, admitted that there existed no registered sale deed A holder. It was, however, admitted that there existed no registered sale deed A holder. It was, however, admitted that there existed no registered sale deed claimant. Upon perusal either in favour of the plaintiff or in favour of the counter-claimant. Upon perusal either in favour of the plaintiff or in favour of the counter either in favour of the plaintiff or in favour of the counter of the record, it was noticed that multiple litigations were pending between the of the record, it was noticed that multiple litigations were pending between the of the record, it was noticed that multiple litigations were pending between the of the record, it was noticed that multiple litigations were pending between the parties regarding the same property. The arding the same property. The Court noted that the main injunction suit noted that the main injunction suit TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -9- - had already been withdrawn, and therefore, no finding was required to be given had already been withdrawn, and therefore, no finding was required to be given had already been withdrawn, and therefore, no finding was required to be given had already been withdrawn, and therefore, no finding was required to be given claim. It was held that the regarding the ownership of the defendant in the counter-claim. It was held that the regarding the ownership of the defendant in the counter regarding the ownership of the defendant in the counter counter-claimant had claimant had produced various documents including Ex.DX 36, the Sub- produced various documents including Ex.DX-36, the Sub 33, the GPA in favour of General Power of Attorney in his favour, Ex.DX-33, the GPA in favour of General Power of Attorney in his favour, Ex.DX General Power of Attorney in his favour, Ex.DX order dated Ashwani Sabharwal dated 21.03.1959, and Ex.DX-37, copy of order dated Ashwani Sabharwal dated 21.03.1959, and Ex.DX Ashwani Sabharwal dated 21.03.1959, and Ex.DX found that the 27.08.1997 issued by the Chandigarh Administration. The Court found that the 27.08.1997 issued by the Chandigarh Administration. T 27.08.1997 issued by the Chandigarh Administration. T Sub-GPA 36) (Ex.DX-36) 36) (Ex.DX authorized authorized authorized Sandeep Kumar Sandeep Kumar Sandeep Kumar to to to apply apply apply for for for occupation/completion certificates, to let out the property, to enter into lease deeds, occupation/completion certificates, to let out the property, to enter into lease deeds, occupation/completion certificates, to let out the property, to enter into lease deeds, occupation/completion certificates, to let out the property, to enter into lease deeds, recover rent, and to initiate legal proceedings to evict tenants or occupants. From recover rent, and to initiate legal proceedings to evict tenants or occupants. From recover rent, and to initiate legal proceedings to evict tenants or occupants. From recover rent, and to initiate legal proceedings to evict tenants or occupants. From this, it was concluded that the Sub GPA conferred upon him sufficient right to was concluded that the Sub-GPA conferred upon him sufficient right to GPA conferred upon him sufficient right to manage and recover possession of the premises on behalf of the principal, though it manage and recover possession of the premises on behalf of the principal, though it manage and recover possession of the premises on behalf of the principal, though it manage and recover possession of the premises on behalf of the principal, though it did not vest ownership rights in him. did not vest ownership rights in him. 13. The Court further observed that under Section 54 of the Tra The nsfer of further observed that under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, a sale of immovable property can only be effected through a Property Act, a sale of immovable property can only be effected through a Property Act, a sale of immovable property can only be effected through a Property Act, a sale of immovable property can only be effected through a registered sale deed, and a power of attorney does not by itself transfer ownership. registered sale deed, and a power of attorney does not by itself transfer ownership. registered sale deed, and a power of attorney does not by itself transfer ownership. registered sale deed, and a power of attorney does not by itself transfer ownership. 14. also noticed that the defendant had failed to produce The trial Court also noticed that the defendant had failed to produce also noticed that the defendant had failed to produce The trial any valid document proving ownership, having relied merely on photocopies of any valid document proving ownership, having relied merely on photocopies of any valid document proving ownership, having relied merely on photocopies of any valid document proving ownership, having relied merely on photocopies of 178/A) whose originals were not produced. The affidavits (Ex.P-178 and Ex.P-178/A) whose originals were not produced. The 178/A) whose originals were not produced. The affidavits (Ex.P d out by the defendant also alleged construction claimed to have been carried out by the defendant also alleged construction claimed to have been carrie alleged construction claimed to have been carrie remained unproved. The cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witness remained unproved. The cross 2 Sanjay examination of the plaintiff’s witness (PW-2 Sanjay Gupta) revealed that no document bore his name, nor was there any reference to Gupta) revealed that no document bore his name, nor was there any reference to Gupta) revealed that no document bore his name, nor was there any reference to Gupta) revealed that no document bore his name, nor was there any reference to , the payments having been made in the name of the defendant. Consequently, the payments having been made in the name of the defendant. Consequently payments having been made in the name of the defendant. Consequently defendant’s plea of ownership and construction was found to be without defendant’s plea of ownership and construction was found to be without defendant’s plea of ownership and construction was found to be without defendant’s plea of ownership and construction was found to be without further observed that there were multiple litigations evidentiary support. The Court further observed that there were multiple litigations further observed that there were multiple litigations evidentiary support. The and criminal proceedings pending between the parties, and the affidavit relied upon and criminal proceedings pending between the parties, and the affidavit relied upon and criminal proceedings pending between the parties, and the affidavit relied upon and criminal proceedings pending between the parties, and the affidavit relied upon TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -10- - endant for asserting ownership was itself under suspicion, with an FIR by the defendant for asserting ownership was itself under suspicion, with an FIR endant for asserting ownership was itself under suspicion, with an FIR endant for asserting ownership was itself under suspicion, with an FIR registered regarding its genuineness. registered regarding its genuineness. 15. claimant successfully proved that he was In contrast, the counter-claimant successfully proved that he was claimant successfully proved that he was In contrast, the counter GPA and that the plaintiff’s occupation of the premises had holding a valid Sub-GPA and that the plaintiff’s occupation of the premises had GPA and that the plaintiff’s occupation of the premises had holding a valid Sub held that the defendant continued even after termination of his license. The Court held that the defendant continued even after termination of his license. The continued even after termination of his license. The erminating the plaintiff’s license and was, therefore, had served a valid notice terminating the plaintiff’s license and was, therefore, erminating the plaintiff’s license and was, therefore, had served a valid notice t Court entitled to recover possession of the ground floor of the house. However, the Court entitled to recover possession of the ground floor of the house. However, the entitled to recover possession of the ground floor of the house. However, the found that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the claim for damages at found that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the claim for damages at found that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the claim for damages at found that there was no evidence on record to substantiate the claim for damages at he evidence regarding the prevalent rate of rent ₹40,000 per month, and based on the evidence regarding the prevalent rate of rent he evidence regarding the prevalent rate of rent ₹40,000 per month, and based on t ₹25,000 per month from for similar accommodation, it assessed the damages at ₹25,000 per month from for similar accommodation, it assessed the damages at for similar accommodation, it assessed the damages at 15.04.2009 till the date of delivery of possession. 15.04.2009 till the date of delivery of possession. 15.04.2009 till the date of delivery of possession. 16. On Issue No.2, relating to the maintainability of the suit, it was held On Issue No.2, relating to the maintainability of the suit, it was held On Issue No.2, relating to the maintainability of the suit, it was held On Issue No.2, relating to the maintainability of the suit, it was held GPA holder, had the right to institute the hat the counter-claimant, being a Sub-GPA holder, had the right to institute the GPA holder, had the right to institute the that the counter claim, as the authority conferred upon him under clause 6 of Ex.DX-36 claim, as the authority conferred upon him under clause 6 of Ex.DX claim, as the authority conferred upon him under clause 6 of Ex.DX counter-claim, as the authority conferred upon him under clause 6 of Ex.DX specifically empowered him to let out, recover rent, and initiate legal action for specifically empowered him to let out, recover rent, and initiate legal action for specifically empowered him to let out, recover rent, and initiate legal action for specifically empowered him to let out, recover rent, and initiate legal action for rdingly, it was held that the counter-claim was maintainable. rdingly, it was held that the counter eviction. Accordingly, it was held that the counter 17. In conclusion, the trial Court decreed the counter In conclusion, the trial claim filed by the decreed the counter-claim filed by the defendant Sandeep Kumar, holding that he was entitled to possession of the ground defendant Sandeep Kumar, holding that he was entitled to possession of the ground defendant Sandeep Kumar, holding that he was entitled to possession of the ground defendant Sandeep Kumar, holding that he was entitled to possession of the ground Chandigarh, from the plaintiff Puran Chand, floor of House No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, from the plaintiff Puran Chand, Chandigarh, from the plaintiff Puran Chand, floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 ₹25,000 per month from 15.04.2009 till actual along with damages at the rate of ₹25,000 per month from 15.04.2009 till actual ₹25,000 per month from 15.04.2009 till actual along with damages at the rate of restoration of possession, with costs. restoration of possession, with costs. Findings of the Lower Appellate Court Findings of the Lower Appellate 18. The learned first Appellate he learned first Appellate Court, after re iating the pleadings, , after re-appreciating the pleadings, , observed that the appellant Puran Chand evidence, and findings of the trial Court, observed that the appellant Puran Chand , observed that the appellant Puran Chand evidence, and findings of the trial had challenged the decree of the trial Court had challenged the decree of the trial primarily on the grounds that the primarily on the grounds that the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -11- - claim filed by respondent no.1 Sandeep Kumar was not maintainable as it counter-claim filed by respondent no.1 Sandeep Kumar was not maintainable as it claim filed by respondent no.1 Sandeep Kumar was not maintainable as it claim filed by respondent no.1 Sandeep Kumar was not maintainable as it power of attorney had been filed by him in his individual capacity and not as a sub-power of attorney had been filed by him in his individual capacity and not as a sub had been filed by him in his individual capacity and not as a sub holder. It was also contended that the trial Court holder. It was also contended that the trial had erred in relying upon the Sub- Court had erred in relying upon the Sub GPA, Ex.DX-36, to decree the counterclaim and that such reliance was misplaced 36, to decree the counterclaim and that such reliance was misplaced to decree the counterclaim and that such reliance was misplaced as the said document did not confer ownership rights upon Sandeep Kumar. The as the said document did not confer ownership rights upon Sandeep Kumar. The as the said document did not confer ownership rights upon Sandeep Kumar. The as the said document did not confer ownership rights upon Sandeep Kumar. The appellant further argued that he had purchased the house in question from Gurdial appellant further argued that he had purchased the house in question from Gurdial appellant further argued that he had purchased the house in question from Gurdial appellant further argued that he had purchased the house in question from Gurdial e consideration and had taken possession of the Singh Dhillon in 1997 for valuable consideration and had taken possession of the e consideration and had taken possession of the Singh Dhillon in 1997 for valuabl same after full payment. He relied upon affidavits executed by Gurdial Singh same after full payment. He relied upon affidavits executed by Gurdial Singh same after full payment. He relied upon affidavits executed by Gurdial Singh same after full payment. He relied upon affidavits executed by Gurdial Singh Dhillon, which, according to him, established his ownership. It was also argued Dhillon, which, according to him, established his ownership. It was also argued Dhillon, which, according to him, established his ownership. It was also argued Dhillon, which, according to him, established his ownership. It was also argued that the trial Court Court failed to consider the fact th at the appellant had raised failed to consider the fact that the appellant had raised construction on the first and second floors of the property and that respondent construction on the first and second floors of the property and that respondent construction on the first and second floors of the property and that respondent construction on the first and second floors of the property and that respondent contradictory. The appellant no.1’s claim of license was inconsistent and self-contradictory. The appellant no.1’s claim of license was inconsistent and self no.1’s claim of license was inconsistent and self s residence to asserted that he had been in possession since 1996 and had shifted his residence to asserted that he had been in possession since 1996 and had shifted hi asserted that he had been in possession since 1996 and had shifted hi the suit house well before the alleged creation of any license in 2009. It was, the suit house well before the alleged creation of any license in 2009. It was, the suit house well before the alleged creation of any license in 2009. It was, the suit house well before the alleged creation of any license in 2009. It was, wrongly decreed the counterclaim based on therefore, argued that the trial Court wrongly decreed the counterclaim based on wrongly decreed the counterclaim based on therefore, argued that the trial Power of Attorney, ignoring the appellant’s ownership and possession. the Sub-Power of Attorney, ignoring the appellant’s ownership and possession. Power of Attorney, ignoring the appellant’s ownership and possession. 19. noted that the appellant had filed a suit The learned Appellate Court noted that the appellant had filed a suit noted that the appellant had filed a suit The learned Appellate for injunction, which he later withdrew, and that the respondent had set up a for injunction, which he later withdrew, and that the respondent had set up a for injunction, which he later withdrew, and that the respondent had set up a for injunction, which he later withdrew, and that the respondent had set up a claim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC, which was duly contested. The counter-claim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC, which was duly contested. The claim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC, which was duly contested. The claim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC, which was duly contested. The Appellate Court appellant had withdrawn his main suit but Court recorded that the appellant had withdrawn his main suit but appellant had withdrawn his main suit but continued to contest the counterclaim and that the counterclaim was supported by continued to contest the counterclaim and that the counterclaim was supported by continued to contest the counterclaim and that the counterclaim was supported by continued to contest the counterclaim and that the counterclaim was supported by fee payment. It further noted that the appellant relied on documents valid Court-fee payment. It further noted that the appellant relied on documents fee payment. It further noted that the appellant relied on documents fee payment. It further noted that the appellant relied on documents like Ex.P-178 and P 178 and P-178/A, which were only photocopi es and not proved in 178/A, which were only photocopies and not proved in observed accordance with law, and that the originals were not produced. The Court observed accordance with law, and that the originals were not produced. The accordance with law, and that the originals were not produced. The that these documents could not confer any title, particularly in view of the settled that these documents could not confer any title, particularly in view of the settled that these documents could not confer any title, particularly in view of the settled that these documents could not confer any title, particularly in view of the settled TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -12- - way of a law that ownership of immovable property can only be transferred by way of a law that ownership of immovable property can only be transferred by law that ownership of immovable property can only be transferred by registered conveyance deed. The contention of the appellant that he had purchased registered conveyance deed. The contention of the appellant that he had purchased registered conveyance deed. The contention of the appellant that he had purchased registered conveyance deed. The contention of the appellant that he had purchased the property through indirect sale was rejected as the same was not supported by a the property through indirect sale was rejected as the same was not supported by a the property through indirect sale was rejected as the same was not supported by a the property through indirect sale was rejected as the same was not supported by a registered document. registered document. 20. The Appellate Court also found that the Sub The Appellate was a also found that the Sub-GPA Ex.DX-36 was a valid and subsisting document executed in favour of Sandeep Kumar, giving him valid and subsisting document executed in favour of Sandeep Kumar, giving him valid and subsisting document executed in favour of Sandeep Kumar, giving him valid and subsisting document executed in favour of Sandeep Kumar, giving him certain powers including to let out, recover rent, and take legal steps for eviction. certain powers including to let out, recover rent, and take legal steps for eviction. certain powers including to let out, recover rent, and take legal steps for eviction. certain powers including to let out, recover rent, and take legal steps for eviction. However, the said document did not confer ownership. Nonetheless, by virtue of However, the said document did not confer ownership. Nonetheless, by virtue of However, the said document did not confer ownership. Nonetheless, by virtue of However, the said document did not confer ownership. Nonetheless, by virtue of clause 6 of the Sub GPA, Sandeep Kumar was authorized to take legal steps to 6 of the Sub-GPA, Sandeep Kumar was authorized to take legal steps to GPA, Sandeep Kumar was authorized to take legal steps to recover possession and to deal with the property on behalf of the principal, thereby recover possession and to deal with the property on behalf of the principal, thereby recover possession and to deal with the property on behalf of the principal, thereby recover possession and to deal with the property on behalf of the principal, thereby making his counterclaim maintainable. making his counterclaim maintainable. 21. claimant It was further held that although the respondent/counter-claimant It was further held that although the respondent/counter It was further held that although the respondent/counter could not be declared the owner of the property, the appellant too had failed to could not be declared the owner of the property, the appellant too had failed to could not be declared the owner of the property, the appellant too had failed to could not be declared the owner of the property, the appellant too had failed to prove his ownership or the capacity in which he continued to occupy the premises. prove his ownership or the capacity in which he continued to occupy the premises. prove his ownership or the capacity in which he continued to occupy the premises. prove his ownership or the capacity in which he continued to occupy the premises. He was neither a tenant nor an owner, and his possession was found to be without He was neither a tenant nor an owner, and his possession was found to be without He was neither a tenant nor an owner, and his possession was found to be without He was neither a tenant nor an owner, and his possession was found to be without any legal right. The Appellate concluded that the appellant’s plea of legal right. The Appellate Court concluded that the appellant’s plea of concluded that the appellant’s plea of ownership based on unproved affidavits and photocopies could not be sustained. ownership based on unproved affidavits and photocopies could not be sustained. ownership based on unproved affidavits and photocopies could not be sustained. ownership based on unproved affidavits and photocopies could not be sustained. On the other hand, the respondent’s right to manage and recover possession as a On the other hand, the respondent’s right to manage and recover possession as a On the other hand, the respondent’s right to manage and recover possession as a On the other hand, the respondent’s right to manage and recover possession as a Sub-GPA holder was duly GPA holder was duly established. 22. Consequently, the learned Additional District Judge found no merit in Consequently, the learned Additional District Judge found no merit in Consequently, the learned Additional District Judge found no merit in Consequently, the learned Additional District Judge found no merit in claim based the appeal and upheld the findings of the trial Court that the counter-claim based the appeal and upheld the findings of the trial the appeal and upheld the findings of the trial GPA was maintainable though it did not confer ownership rights. It was on Sub-GPA was maintainable though it did not confer ownership rights. It was GPA was maintainable though it did not confer ownership rights. It was GPA was maintainable though it did not confer ownership rights. It was affirmed that the respondent had the authority to file and maintain the further affirmed that the respondent had the authority to file and maintain the affirmed that the respondent had the authority to file and maintain the affirmed that the respondent had the authority to file and maintain the GPA. counterclaim and to seek possession of the house under clause 6 of the Sub-GPA. counterclaim and to seek possession of the house under clause 6 of the Sub counterclaim and to seek possession of the house under clause 6 of the Sub In view of the overall appreciation of evidence and legal position, the Appellate In view of the overall appreciation of evidence and legal position, the Appellate In view of the overall appreciation of evidence and legal position, the Appellate In view of the overall appreciation of evidence and legal position, the Appellate TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -13- - Court held that there held that there was no ground to interfere with the well reasoned judgment was no ground to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment of the trial Court and accordingly dismissed the appeal on 09.05.2019, affirming Court and accordingly dismissed the appeal on 09.05.2019, affirming and accordingly dismissed the appeal on 09.05.2019, affirming the decree in favour of respondent Sandeep Kumar. the decree in favour of respondent Sandeep Kumar. the decree in favour of respondent Sandeep Kumar. 23. Aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Courts below, Pu Aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the s below, Puran Chand plaintiff filed the present regular second appeal. It is pertinent to mention Chand plaintiff filed the present regular second appeal. It is pertinent to mention Chand plaintiff filed the present regular second appeal. It is pertinent to mention Chand plaintiff filed the present regular second appeal. It is pertinent to mention Puran Chand died and here that during the pendency of the present appeal plaintiff -Puran Chand died and here that during the pendency of the present appeal here that during the pendency of the present appeal his legal representatives maintained the present appeal. representatives maintained the present appeal. 24. Upon notice, respondents appeared and Upon notice, respondents appeared and contested the appeal. of learned counsel for the appellant Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant of learned counsel for the appellant 25. The learned counsel for the appellant, representing the legal The learned counsel for the appellant, representing the legal The learned counsel for the appellant, representing the legal The learned counsel for the appellant, representing the legal representatives of deceased Puran Chand, assailed the concurrent findings of the of deceased Puran Chand, assailed the concurrent findings of t of deceased Puran Chand, assailed the concurrent findings of t s below as being perverse and contrary to law and evidence on record. It was Courts below as being perverse and contrary to law and evidence on record. It was s below as being perverse and contrary to law and evidence on record. It was s below as being perverse and contrary to law and evidence on record. It was argued that both the Trial Court and the Lower Appellate argued that both the Trial erred in decreeing and the Lower Appellate Court erred in decreeing General Power of Attorney the counterclaim of the respondent on the basis of Sub-General Power of Attorney the counterclaim of the respondent on the basis of Sub the counterclaim of the respondent on the basis of Sub Ex. D/36, despite holding that the said document did not confer any ownership Ex. D/36, despite holding that the said document did not confer any ownership Ex. D/36, despite holding that the said document did not confer any ownership Ex. D/36, despite holding that the said document did not confer any ownership ot the rights. It was submitted that the respondent/counter claimant is admittedly not the rights. It was submitted that the respondent/counter claimant is admittedly n rights. It was submitted that the respondent/counter claimant is admittedly n owner of the suit property as there exists no registered sale deed in his favour, and owner of the suit property as there exists no registered sale deed in his favour, and owner of the suit property as there exists no registered sale deed in his favour, and owner of the suit property as there exists no registered sale deed in his favour, and general, does not create or transfer that a power of attorney, whether general or sub-general, does not create or transfer that a power of attorney, whether general or sub that a power of attorney, whether general or sub any title. The counsel contended that the Courts below failed to appreciate t any title. The counsel contended that the hat the s below failed to appreciate that the question of possession and ownership was wrongly decided against the appellant question of possession and ownership was wrongly decided against the appellant question of possession and ownership was wrongly decided against the appellant question of possession and ownership was wrongly decided against the appellant without properly determining the capacity in which the appellant was occupying without properly determining the capacity in which the appellant was occupying without properly determining the capacity in which the appellant was occupying without properly determining the capacity in which the appellant was occupying standing possession of the suit property, the premises. The appellant, being in long-standing possession of the suit property, standing possession of the suit property, the premises. The appellant, being in long laimed ownership based on purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon, and in that had claimed ownership based on purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon, and in that laimed ownership based on purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon, and in that laimed ownership based on purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon, and in that regard had already filed a separate suit for declaration of ownership, which is regard had already filed a separate suit for declaration of ownership, which is regard had already filed a separate suit for declaration of ownership, which is regard had already filed a separate suit for declaration of ownership, which is pending adjudication before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. pending adjudication before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. pending adjudication before the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -14- - 26. that the onus to prove ownership of the property It was further argued that the onus to prove ownership of the property that the onus to prove ownership of the property It was further argued rested upon the respondent/counter claimant and not the appellant, as the rested upon the respondent/counter claimant and not the appellant, as the rested upon the respondent/counter claimant and not the appellant, as the rested upon the respondent/counter claimant and not the appellant, as the respondent had come forward asserting the right to possession and damages under respondent had come forward asserting the right to possession and damages under respondent had come forward asserting the right to possession and damages under respondent had come forward asserting the right to possession and damages under the alleged sub- ssue framed by GPA. The counsel pointed out that even as per the issue framed by -GPA. The counsel pointed out that ev the trial Court Whether the plaintiff is liable to hand over the vacant possession “Whether the plaintiff is liable to hand over the vacant possession Whether the plaintiff is liable to hand over the vacant possession A, Chandigarh, along with other of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, along with other of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 persons brought by him, and also damages as set up in the counterclaim?”, persons brought by him, and also damages as set up in the cou persons brought by him, and also damages as set up in the cou the burden squarely lay upon the respondent/counter burden squarely lay upon the respondent to establish his /counter-claimant to establish his ownership and entitlement. However, the respondent himself had filed a separate ownership and entitlement. However, the respondent himself had filed a separate ownership and entitlement. However, the respondent himself had filed a separate ownership and entitlement. However, the respondent himself had filed a separate suit for specific performance against the original owner, Shri Om Parkash, seeking suit for specific performance against the original owner, Shri Om Parkash, seeking suit for specific performance against the original owner, Shri Om Parkash, seeking suit for specific performance against the original owner, Shri Om Parkash, seeking ecution of a registered sale deed in his favour, which was subsequently execution of a registered sale deed in his favour, which was subsequently ecution of a registered sale deed in his favour, which was subsequently ecution of a registered sale deed in his favour, which was subsequently dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. The certified dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. The certified dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. The certified dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh. The certified copy of the said judgment was produced on record by way of additional evidence. copy of the said judgment was produced on record by way of additional evidence. copy of the said judgment was produced on record by way of additional evidence. copy of the said judgment was produced on record by way of additional evidence. that once the respondent’s suit for specific performance Thus, it was submitted that once the respondent’s suit for specific performance that once the respondent’s suit for specific performance Thus, it was submitted stood dismissed and no title had passed to him, his counterclaim based on the same stood dismissed and no title had passed to him, his counterclaim based on the same stood dismissed and no title had passed to him, his counterclaim based on the same stood dismissed and no title had passed to him, his counterclaim based on the same alleged authority could not have been decreed. alleged authority could not have been decreed. 27. s below The learned counsel further contended that the Courts below The learned counsel further contended that the The learned counsel further contended that the General Power of construed the scope of the powers conferred under the Sub-General Power of construed the scope of the powers conferred under the Sub misconstrued the scope of the powers conferred under the Sub Attorney Ex. D/36. It was emphasized that under the Power of Attorney Act, 1882, Attorney Ex. D/36. It was emphasized that under the Power of Attorney Act, 1882, Attorney Ex. D/36. It was emphasized that under the Power of Attorney Act, 1882, Attorney Ex. D/36. It was emphasized that under the Power of Attorney Act, 1882, an agent derives his authority strictly from the principal and cannot exceed the an agent derives his authority strictly from the principal and cannot exceed the an agent derives his authority strictly from the principal and cannot exceed the an agent derives his authority strictly from the principal and cannot exceed the General Power of Attorney, when read with the General Power of Attorney, when read with t powers delegated to him. The Sub-General Power of Attorney, when read with t powers delegated to namely, Ex. D/33 executed by Om Parkash in preceding chain of documents, namely, Ex. D/33 executed by Om Parkash in namely, Ex. D/33 executed by Om Parkash in preceding chain of documents, favour of Ashwani Sabharwal and Tarsem Sabharwal, Ex. DW/32 (Special Power favour of Ashwani Sabharwal and Tarsem Sabharwal, Ex. DW/32 (Special Power favour of Ashwani Sabharwal and Tarsem Sabharwal, Ex. DW/32 (Special Power favour of Ashwani Sabharwal and Tarsem Sabharwal, Ex. DW/32 (Special Power B.K. Sabharwal, Ex. DX/34 and of Attorney) executed by Om Parkash in favour of B.K. Sabharwal, Ex. DX/34 and of Attorney) executed by Om Parkash in favour of of Attorney) executed by Om Parkash in favour of Ex. DX/35 executed and cancelled between Ashwani Sabharwal and Gurdial Singh Ex. DX/35 executed and cancelled between Ashwani Sabharwal and Gurdial Singh Ex. DX/35 executed and cancelled between Ashwani Sabharwal and Gurdial Singh Ex. DX/35 executed and cancelled between Ashwani Sabharwal and Gurdial Singh TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -15- - ur of Dhillon, and finally Ex. DX/36 executed by Ashwani Sabharwal in favour of Dhillon, and finally Ex. DX/36 executed by Ashwani Sabharwal in favo Dhillon, and finally Ex. DX/36 executed by Ashwani Sabharwal in favo respondent Sandeep Kumar, makes it clear that the Sub respondent Sandeep Kumar, e any makes it clear that the Sub-GPA did not authorize any sale or confer sale or confer sale or confer sale or confer title. The said authority was title. The said authority was title. The said authority was title. The said authority was limited only limited only limited only limited only to obtaining to obtaining to obtaining to obtaining occupation/completion certificates, letting out the premises, entering into rent or occupation/completion certificates, letting out the premises, entering into rent or occupation/completion certificates, letting out the premises, entering into rent or occupation/completion certificates, letting out the premises, entering into rent or lease agreements, recovering rent, and issuing receipts or legal notices. There was lease agreements, recovering rent, and issuing receipts or legal notices. There was lease agreements, recovering rent, and issuing receipts or legal notices. There was lease agreements, recovering rent, and issuing receipts or legal notices. There was nferred to induct a person into the property as a licensee or to transfer no power conferred to induct a person into the property as a licensee or to transfer nferred to induct a person into the property as a licensee or to transfer nferred to induct a person into the property as a licensee or to transfer any ownership rights. The lower appellate Court any ownership rights. The lower appellate , however, extended the language Court, however, extended the language GPA beyond its terms, which was impermissible and contrary to settled of the sub-GPA beyond its terms, which was impermissible and contrary to settled GPA beyond its terms, which was impermissible and contrary to settled GPA beyond its terms, which was impermissible and contrary to settled law. 28. itted that the respondent had failed to prove how he had It was submitted that the respondent had failed to prove how he had itted that the respondent had failed to prove how he had It was subm inducted the appellant into the property as a licensee when he possessed no such inducted the appellant into the property as a licensee when he possessed no such inducted the appellant into the property as a licensee when he possessed no such inducted the appellant into the property as a licensee when he possessed no such authority. In fact, the appellant’s possession was lawful as owner in pursuance of authority. In fact, the appellant’s possession was lawful as owner in pursuance of authority. In fact, the appellant’s possession was lawful as owner in pursuance of authority. In fact, the appellant’s possession was lawful as owner in pursuance of , and till date, the legal heirs of the appellant, purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon, and till date, the legal heirs of the appellant, , and till date, the legal heirs of the appellant, purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon including his aged and handicapped wife, continue to be in possession of the suit including his aged and handicapped wife, continue to be in possession of the suit including his aged and handicapped wife, continue to be in possession of the suit including his aged and handicapped wife, continue to be in possession of the suit property. It was argued that in law, only the owner of a property can act as a property. It was argued that in law, only the owner of a property can act as a property. It was argued that in law, only the owner of a property can act as a property. It was argued that in law, only the owner of a property can act as a e owner, his claim that the appellant was licensor, and since the respondent is not the owner, his claim that the appellant was e owner, his claim that the appellant was licensor, and since the respondent is not th 1, being the a licensee is untenable. The counsel further referred to document Ex. P-1, being the a licensee is untenable. The counsel further referred to document Ex. P a licensee is untenable. The counsel further referred to document Ex. P application form for conversion of the leasehold site into freehold, wherein the application form for conversion of the leasehold site into freehold, wherein the application form for conversion of the leasehold site into freehold, wherein the application form for conversion of the leasehold site into freehold, wherein the name of Puran Chand son of Sadhu Ram, resident of House No. 222, Sector 44 name of Puran Chand son of Sadhu Ram, resident o name of Puran Chand son of Sadhu Ram, resident o f House No. 222, Sector 44-A, Chandigarh, is recorded as the purchaser, establishing that even in official records, Chandigarh, is recorded as the purchaser, establishing that even in official records, Chandigarh, is recorded as the purchaser, establishing that even in official records, Chandigarh, is recorded as the purchaser, establishing that even in official records, ownership stood reflected in his favour. ownership stood reflected in his favour. 29. s below overlooked the he learned counsel contended that both Courts below overlooked the he learned counsel contended that both The learned counsel contended that both , which had been duly executed by B.K. Sabharwal, crucial document Ex. DX/32, which had been duly executed by B.K. Sabharwal, , which had been duly executed by B.K. Sabharwal, crucial document Ex. DX/32 who was expressly authorized to sell and transfer the lease rights of the property who was expressly authorized to sell and transfer the lease rights of the property who was expressly authorized to sell and transfer the lease rights of the property who was expressly authorized to sell and transfer the lease rights of the property and the building to be constructed thereon. It was, therefore, submitted that the and the building to be constructed thereon. It was, therefore, submitted that the and the building to be constructed thereon. It was, therefore, submitted that the and the building to be constructed thereon. It was, therefore, submitted that the TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -16- - ere legally unsustainable as they were concurrent findings of the Courts below were legally unsustainable as they were ere legally unsustainable as they were concurrent findings of the appreciation of the evidence on record, as well as on based on misreading and non-appreciation of the evidence on record, as well as on appreciation of the evidence on record, as well as on based on misreading and non GPA. It was urged that misinterpretation of the powers conferred under the sub-GPA. It was urged that misinterpretation of the powers conferred under the sub misinterpretation of the powers conferred under the sub both substantial questions of law, th substantial questions of law, whether the responden t could claim possession whether the respondent could claim possession GPA could or maintain a counterclaim in absence of title and whether the sub-GPA could or maintain a counterclaim in absence of title and whether the sub or maintain a counterclaim in absence of title and whether the sub be answered in confer powers beyond those delegated by the original owner, be answered in confer powers beyond those delegated by the original owner confer powers beyond those delegated by the original owner favour of the appellant. favour of the appellant. 30. for the appellant In support of his arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant In support of his arguments, the learned counsel In support of his arguments, the learned counsel Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and another relied upon Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and another Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and another Suraj Lamp and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana and another 2011 (4) RCR (Civil) 669, to emphasize that a power of attorney or sub 2011 (4) RCR (Civil) 669 power of , to emphasize that a power of attorney or sub-power of that attorney does not convey ownership or confer title in immovable property, and that attorney does not convey ownership or confer title in immovable property, and attorney does not convey ownership or confer title in immovable property, and transfer of title can only be effected through a registered conveyance deed. On transfer of title can only be effected through a registered conveyance deed. On transfer of title can only be effected through a registered conveyance deed. On transfer of title can only be effected through a registered conveyance deed. On these submissions, the counsel prayed that the judgments and decrees of both these submissions, the counsel prayed that the judgments and decrees of both these submissions, the counsel prayed that the judgments and decrees of both these submissions, the counsel prayed that the judgments and decrees of both s below be set aside and the counterclaim of the respondent be dismissed Courts below be set aside and the counterclaim of the respondent be dismissed s below be set aside and the counterclaim of the respondent be dismissed s below be set aside and the counterclaim of the respondent be dismissed with costs. Submissions of learned counsel for the respondents issions of learned counsel for the respondents issions of learned counsel for the respondents 31. counter claimant supported The learned counsel for the respondent–counter claimant supported The learned counsel for the respondent The learned counsel for the respondent s below and submitted that the judgments and the concurrent findings of the Courts below and submitted that the judgments and s below and submitted that the judgments and the concurrent findings of the oned and based on due decrees passed in favour of the respondent were well-reasoned and based on due decrees passed in favour of the respondent were well decrees passed in favour of the respondent were well appreciation of evidence and documents on record. It was contended that the appreciation of evidence and documents on record. It was contended that the appreciation of evidence and documents on record. It was contended that the appreciation of evidence and documents on record. It was contended that the General Power of Attorney holder of respondent Sandeep Kumar, being the Sub-General Power of Attorney holder of General Power of Attorney holder of respondent Sandeep Kumar, being the Sub the original owner Om Parkash, derived his authority through a valid and the original owner Om Parkash, derived his authority through a valid and the original owner Om Parkash, derived his authority through a valid and the original owner Om Parkash, derived his authority through a valid and g chain of documents, particularly Ex. DX/33 (General Power of Attorney subsisting chain of documents, particularly Ex. DX/33 (General Power of Attorney g chain of documents, particularly Ex. DX/33 (General Power of Attorney g chain of documents, particularly Ex. DX/33 (General Power of Attorney in favour of Ashwani Sabharwal), Ex. DX/34 and Ex. DX/35 (subsequent transfer in favour of Ashwani Sabharwal), Ex. DX/34 and Ex. DX/35 (subsequent transfer in favour of Ashwani Sabharwal), Ex. DX/34 and Ex. DX/35 (subsequent transfer in favour of Ashwani Sabharwal), Ex. DX/34 and Ex. DX/35 (subsequent transfer General Power of Attorney executed in and cancellation), and Ex. DX/36 (Sub-General Power of Attorney executed in General Power of Attorney executed in and cancellation), and Ex. DX/36 (Sub TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -17- - favour of respondent). It was urged that the Sub favour of respondent). It was GPA was executed with full urged that the Sub-GPA was executed with full authority to manage, let out, and recover rent from the property, and to take all authority to manage, let out, and recover rent from the property, and to take all authority to manage, let out, and recover rent from the property, and to take all authority to manage, let out, and recover rent from the property, and to take all necessary legal steps including institution of proceedings for eviction and necessary legal steps including institution of proceedings for eviction and necessary legal steps including institution of proceedings for eviction and necessary legal steps including institution of proceedings for eviction and e said document had never been possession of the premises. It was submitted that the said document had never been possession of the premises. It was submitted that th possession of the premises. It was submitted that th revoked or cancelled, and therefore, remained operative in favour of the revoked or cancelled, and therefore, remained operative in favour of the revoked or cancelled, and therefore, remained operative in favour of the revoked or cancelled, and therefore, remained operative in favour of the respondent, thereby giving him locus standi to maintain the counter claim. respondent, thereby giving him locus standi to maintain the counter claim. respondent, thereby giving him locus standi to maintain the counter claim. 32. It was further argued that the appellant was occupying the ground It was further argued that the appellant was occupying the ground It was further argued that the appellant was occupying the ground It was further argued that the appellant was occupying the ground of the property as a mere licensee under the authority of the respondent and floor of the property as a mere licensee under the authority of the respondent and of the property as a mere licensee under the authority of the respondent and of the property as a mere licensee under the authority of the respondent and had no ownership or tenancy rights therein. His possession being permissive, he had no ownership or tenancy rights therein. His possession being permissive, he had no ownership or tenancy rights therein. His possession being permissive, he had no ownership or tenancy rights therein. His possession being permissive, he was bound to vacate the premises once the license was terminated. The respondent was bound to vacate the premises once the license was terminated. The respondent was bound to vacate the premises once the license was terminated. The respondent was bound to vacate the premises once the license was terminated. The respondent counter claim seeking possession and mesne profits at the rate of rightly filed the counter claim seeking possession and mesne profits at the rate of counter claim seeking possession and mesne profits at the rate of rightly filed the per month w.e.f. 15.04.2009 till actual delivery of possession. The Rs.25,000/- per month w.e.f. 15.04.2009 till actual delivery of possession. The per month w.e.f. 15.04.2009 till actual delivery of possession. The per month w.e.f. 15.04.2009 till actual delivery of possession. The Trial Court and the Appellate , after appreciating oral and documentary and the Appellate Court, after appreciating oral and documentary , after appreciating oral and documentary evidence, decreed the counter claim, and the mesne profits were computed and evidence, decreed the counter claim, and the mesne profits were computed and evidence, decreed the counter claim, and the mesne profits were computed and evidence, decreed the counter claim, and the mesne profits were computed and , with the total amount due up to 14.10.2025 being partly received through Court, with the total amount due up to 14.10.2025 being , with the total amount due up to 14.10.2025 being partly received through Rs.49.50 lakhs, out of which Rs. .49.50 lakhs, out of which Rs.5.58 lakhs had already be ived, leaving a 5.58 lakhs had already been received, leaving a 43.92 lakhs as payable to the decree-holder. 43.92 lakhs as payable to the decree balance of Rs.43.92 lakhs as payable to the decree 33. The counsel contended that both Court The counsel contended that both s had rightly held that though Courts had rightly held that though GPA did not create ownership, it validly empowered the respondent to the Sub-GPA did not create ownership, it validly empowered the respondent to GPA did not create ownership, it validly empowered the respondent to GPA did not create ownership, it validly empowered the respondent to r possession and eviction of any person unlawfully institute proceedings for possession and eviction of any person unlawfully r possession and eviction of any person unlawfully institute proceedings fo occupying the premises. The respondent’s right to maintain the counter claim occupying the premises. The respondent’s right to maintain the counter claim occupying the premises. The respondent’s right to maintain the counter claim occupying the premises. The respondent’s right to maintain the counter claim GPA holder flowed directly from clause 6 of Ex. DX/36, which authorized the Sub-GPA holder flowed directly from clause 6 of Ex. DX/36, which authorized the Sub flowed directly from clause 6 of Ex. DX/36, which authorized the Sub cover rent, eject tenants or occupants to let out the premises, issue rent receipts, recover rent, eject tenants or occupants cover rent, eject tenants or occupants to let out the premises, issue rent receipts, re through legal process, and replace them with others. The appellant’s claim of through legal process, and replace them with others. The appellant’s claim of through legal process, and replace them with others. The appellant’s claim of through legal process, and replace them with others. The appellant’s claim of ownership was without basis as he had failed to produce any sale deed or ownership was without basis as he had failed to produce any sale deed or ownership was without basis as he had failed to produce any sale deed or ownership was without basis as he had failed to produce any sale deed or TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -18- - l Singh Dhillon registered document of title, and his alleged purchase from Gurdial Singh Dhillon registered document of title, and his alleged purchase from Gurdia registered document of title, and his alleged purchase from Gurdia was not proved. It was also highlighted that the appellant’s own suit for permanent was not proved. It was also highlighted that the appellant’s own suit for permanent was not proved. It was also highlighted that the appellant’s own suit for permanent was not proved. It was also highlighted that the appellant’s own suit for permanent injunction had been withdrawn, and therefore, he could not challenge the counter injunction had been withdrawn, and therefore, he could not challenge the counter injunction had been withdrawn, and therefore, he could not challenge the counter injunction had been withdrawn, and therefore, he could not challenge the counter claim. 34. The counsel relied upon the judgments in Hari Dass v. Sagar Cha The counsel relied upon the judgments in The counsel relied upon the judgments in Hari Dass v. Sagar Chand Sunder Lal v. Sita Bali (2003(3) RCR (Civil) 243, to Sunder Lal v. Sita Bali (2003(3) RCR (Civil) 243 (2017(2) RCR (Civil) 80 and Sunder Lal v. Sita Bali (2003(3) RCR (Civil) 243 (2017(2) RCR (Civil) 80 contend that the relationship between a licensor and licensee is purely personal and contend that the relationship between a licensor and licensee is purely personal and contend that the relationship between a licensor and licensee is purely personal and contend that the relationship between a licensor and licensee is purely personal and transferable, and that the right of a licensee ceases upon the death of the non-transferable, and that the right of a licensee ceases upon the death of the transferable, and that the right of a licensee ceases upon the death of the transferable, and that the right of a licensee ceases upon the death of the r. It was argued that since Puran Chand, the original appellant, had died licensor. It was argued that since Puran Chand, the original appellant, had died r. It was argued that since Puran Chand, the original appellant, had died r. It was argued that since Puran Chand, the original appellant, had died during the pendency of the appeal, the license automatically stood terminated and during the pendency of the appeal, the license automatically stood terminated and during the pendency of the appeal, the license automatically stood terminated and during the pendency of the appeal, the license automatically stood terminated and Chinnan v. could not be inherited by his legal heirs. Reliance was also placed on Chinnan v. could not be inherited by his legal heirs. Reliance was also placed on could not be inherited by his legal heirs. Reliance was also placed on , reiterating that a license is only a personal Ranjithammal, AIR 1931 Madras 216, reiterating that a license is only a personal , reiterating that a license is only a personal Ranjithammal, AIR right and does not create any interest in the property. right and does not create any interest in the property. right and does not create any interest in the property. 35. s had rightly decreed It was therefore submitted that the lower Courts had rightly decreed It was therefore submitted that the lower It was therefore submitted that the lower GPA and the the counter claim of the respondent on the basis of the valid Sub-GPA and the the counter claim of the respondent on the basis of the valid S the counter claim of the respondent on the basis of the valid S termination of license. The claim of ownership set up by the appellant was illusory, termination of license. The claim of ownership set up by the appellant was illusory, termination of license. The claim of ownership set up by the appellant was illusory, termination of license. The claim of ownership set up by the appellant was illusory, unsubstantiated, and stood contradicted by his own documents and conduct. The unsubstantiated, and stood contradicted by his own documents and conduct. The unsubstantiated, and stood contradicted by his own documents and conduct. The unsubstantiated, and stood contradicted by his own documents and conduct. The ense, appellant’s continued possession was unauthorized after termination of the license, appellant’s continued possession was unauthorized after termination of the lic appellant’s continued possession was unauthorized after termination of the lic entitling the respondent to both possession and mesne profits. The learned counsel entitling the respondent to both possession and mesne profits. The learned counsel entitling the respondent to both possession and mesne profits. The learned counsel entitling the respondent to both possession and mesne profits. The learned counsel prayed for dismissal of the appeal. prayed for dismissal of the appeal. Findings of this Court Findings of this 36. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for and the Lower the appellant and for the respondent, the record of the trial Court and the Lower the appellant and for the respondent, the record of the trial the appellant and for the respondent, the record of the trial Appellate Court , the evidence on record and the documents exhibited therein. Court, the evidence on record and the documents exhibited therein. TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -19- - 37. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the The contention of l earned counsel for the appellant that the Court Courts below erred in giving relief to the counter-claimant on the basis of a Sub below erred in giving relief to the counter General claimant on the basis of a Sub-General 36) because, he says, a Power of Attorney cannot Power of Attorney (Ex.DX-36) because, he says, a Power of Attorney cannot 36) because, he says, a Power of Attorney cannot Power of Attorney (Ex. convey title and therefore the counter-claimant ha convey title and therefore the counter d no locus to seek possession or claimant had no locus to seek possession or damages considered
Decision
In the result, for the reasons recorded above, this Court In the result, no merit for the reasons recorded above, this Court finds no merit in the Regular Second Appeal. The concurrent judgments and decrees dated in the Regular Second Appeal. The concurrent judgments and decrees dated in the Regular Second Appeal. The concurrent judgments and decrees dated in the Regular Second Appeal. The concurrent judgments and decrees dated and learned lower and 09.05.2019 passed by the learned trial Court and learned lower and 09.05.2019 passed by the learned trial Court 03.07.2015 and 09.05.2019 passed by the learned trial Court appellate Court, respectively, are affirmed. The decree in favour of respondent , respectively, are affirmed. The decree in favour of respondent are affirmed. The decree in favour of respondent No.1 for possession of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44-A, No.1 for possession of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 No.1 for possession of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 No.1 for possession of the ground floor of House No. 222, Sector 44 ₹25,000 per month from Chandigarh, together with mesne profits at the rate of ₹25,000 per month from Chandigarh, together with mesne profits at the rate of Chandigarh, together with mesne profits at the rate of and 09 till actual delivery of possession, as computed by the trial Court and 09 till actual delivery of possession, as computed by the trial 15.04.2009 till actual delivery of possession, as computed by the trial TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document RSA-2784-2019 2019 (O&M) -27- - , shall stand. The balance amount (as reduced/confirmed by the Appellate Court, shall stand. The balance amount (as , shall stand. The balance amount (as reduced/confirmed by the Appellate recorded in the appeal papers up to 14.10.2025) shall be paid in accordance with recorded in the appeal papers up to 14.10.2025) shall be paid in accordance with recorded in the appeal papers up to 14.10.2025) shall be paid in accordance with recorded in the appeal papers up to 14.10.2025) shall be paid in accordance with l adjustments for amounts already realized. The appellant law subject to the usual adjustments for amounts already realized. The appellant l adjustments for amounts already realized. The appellant law subject to the usua shall pay costs of this appeal to the respondent, shall pay costs o parties shall bear their respective f this appeal to the respondent, parties shall bear their respective costs below. 50. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. 2025 November 04, 2025 tripti (MANDEEP PANNU MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking speaking : Speaking Whether speaking/non : Yes/No : Yes/No Whether reportable Whether reportable TRIPTI SAINI 2025.11.10 13:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document