Termination of agency

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

1. Amar Nath vs Gian Chand

   Supreme Court of India 28 Jan 2022 Binding (Supreme Court) Reportable (2022) 1 SCC (Online) [Citation format as per Supreme Court reporting standards]

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   When a person holding a power of attorney executes a document on behalf of the principal and presents that document for registration, such person is the 'person executing' the document within the meaning of Section 32(a) of the Registration Act and is entitled to present it for registration without producing the original power of attorney. The production of the original power of attorney is not mandatory for valid registration. Section 18A of the Registration Act requires production of a true copy of the document being registered (not the power of attorney) to expedite the copying process. Sections 32(c) and 33 of the Registration Act, which deal with production of power of attorney, apply only to agents presenting documents for registration, not to persons who have themselves executed the document. Cancellation of a power of attorney, even if validly effected, does not become effective against third parties until notice of such cancellation is brought to their knowledge, as per Section 208 of the Indian Contract Act. The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC by reappreciating evidence and reversing concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court on factual matters.

   On this section: Deals with termination of agency; agency can be terminated by principal revoking authority of agent

   Read the full order on eCourts India

2. Sudarshanacharya vs Purushottamacharya

   Supreme Court of India 04 Sep 2012 Persuasive (Other HC) - Supreme Court Decision with binding effect on legal prin Marked not reportable

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   In criminal proceedings, while the right to speedy trial is a fundamental component of Article 21 of the Constitution, courts cannot prescribe automatic or mechanical time limits at the end of which criminal trials must be terminated and the accused acquitted or discharged. Courts must exercise discretion based on the totality of circumstances including the conduct of parties, nature of the offence, and whether allowing proceedings to continue would constitute an abuse of process. The inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code may be invoked to quash proceedings only when the court is satisfied on material on record that continued proceedings would be an abuse of process or when ends of justice require it. In cases involving criminal breach of trust relating to institutional property, where the accused has engaged in delay tactics through repeated discharge applications and the complainant has demonstrated continued interest in prosecution, the continuation of proceedings does not constitute an abuse of process.

   On this section: Appellant's counsel argued that death of principal extinguishes the power of attorney holder's right to continue proceedings, relying on agency law principles.

   Read the full order on eCourts India

3. Vls Prasad vs Strip India Ltd.

   High Court 14 Mar 2011 Persuasive (Other HC)

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   A Power of Attorney is legally terminated automatically upon the death of the principal executant. Any subsequent sale deed executed by the attorney on behalf of the deceased principal is void and can transfer no right, title, or interest.

   On this section: Applied to establish that a general power of attorney automatically ceases with the death of the original principal.

   Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.