Lawfully yours: By Retd Justice K Chandru

CHENNAI: Unlike irrevocable Power of Attorney, 'principal' wields power in other cases

Q: An NRI gave Power of Attorney (POA) to his father in 1999 and cancelled the same on December 26, 2022. Before cancellation, he gave POA to a builder on November 29, 2022. As such power vested with both his father and builder between these two dates, you had earlier observed that there is no illegality in the second POA. Our concern is we executed the sale deed and construction agreement on December 11, 2022, with the builder, which is before the cancellation of the first POA by NRI to his father. (Both documents viz. sale deed and construction agreement registered on June 1, 2023). Sir, will the overlapping POAs between 11/22 and 12/22 in any manner affect the legality, as we have paid 90 per cent of the value of the flat? In another case, in a construction agreement executed by us for another flat, the builder had promised to deliver the flat within nine months from the date of obtaining due permission. He also assured a monthly compensation of rental value for each month’s delay. However, it is now overdue by 5 months and the company is hesitating to abide by the promise. -- Raja Asokan, Chennai

A: Even when a POA is in operation, nothing can prevent the principal (the person making POA) from executing documents in relation to the property. This is not a case of POA with consideration (which is irrevocable). Hence the subsequent registration of the document, even without cancelling the POA in favour of the NRI’s father, is valid. As regards the delay in honouring the builder agreement, you can sue the builder. If in the agreement there is any clause for arbitration, you may have to get an arbitrator appointed by the court and proceed with the arbitration.

Courts now considering notion of majority in redevelopment cases

Q: Can one owner of a property halt redevelopment of a project since he/she is afraid to go ahead with the works as other owners had not consented to sign a Memorandum of Understanding? The MoU is insisted on since the owner wishes to remain safe on the legality of the redevelopment project, and the bank has also sought the same. However, other owners are refusing to sign the same. What is the remedy for the person who is for MoU? -- Baskar Seshadri, Thiruvengadam Street, Mandaveli

A: Even one owner of the property can stall any fresh joint development. However, recently the courts are introducing the decision by the majority to go for development so as to avoid a veto by individuals.