Legaliity of future dated power of attorney
glen@goa
(Querist) 26 October 2015
This query is : Resolved
A development agreement along with Power of attorney is executed and presented on 15-1-2015 between a family and a developer kept ADM and registered on 16-1-2015. Post registration, in the document one family member is shown represented by another member of the family by a Power of attorney by reason of disability, this p.o.a is not registered but notarized (blood relation) interestingly this notarization is dated 16-1-2015, Assuming the acceptance of such presented document itself is a grave mistake (?) by the registrar***, is this document a valid document. In the document executed and presented on 15th and registered on 16th Does the member representing the disabled member have the power. Is the document valid
***(fact is 'the document presented on 15th is altered to replace the disabled member with a representative on 16th).
Chanchal Nag Chowdhury
(Expert) 26 October 2015
The POA should have ben registered as well. In any event, at most, the POA may be voidable at the option of the disabled member.
Kumar Doab
(Expert) 26 October 2015
Look into the serial number of the document and time also if time is also printed..................and determine which was registered first.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 26 October 2015
If the principal has not given POA, he should challenge the document and steps taken on this.
glen@goa
(Querist) 26 October 2015
Thanks for the prompt and en-lighting reply's I would like to add and clear some more information and some background.
a. The developer presented the document on 15th without genuine signs of the family members and kept the document ADM for the next day ( A common practice to save time and rush at the registration office by replacing the signature page with the genuine one's the next day), In here he even signed for the disabled member assuming him healthy or willing).The Summary page of docs on 15th has entries the five members as 'not available for identification( but have executed the docs)'.
'The next day as the disabled member cannot, The Document(s)'* (development agreement and its p.o.a) is registered between developer and the 5 members of a family of which one member is represented by another member by rights conferred by a new 2 page P.O.A notarized on 16th. 'The Document(s)' which were executed and presented on 15th are altered** to accomodate the effects of the new fresh P.o.a, to show the disabled member as not signing for himself but represented by the P.o.a holder member who also signs for himself.
**hail registrars 'I 4 India'
@leaned Goyalji
The principal now rests in peace demised couple of days after the registration.
@learned Chowdhury
Thanks for the answer
referring to
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/need-of-registrability-of-Power-of-Attorney-31576.asp#.Vi4yeyulf74
can we say in this case of p.o.a to a blood relate it only attracts Rs.500/- as stamp duty and is optionally registered not mandatory? kind attn. its old post.
@learned Doab
thanks for the light.
it is notarized before the registration on 16th. Does it that means the re-presenting member now has the power to appear for photo identification etc.
Assuming you have read the newly supplied information can we question the fresh signature of the representing member. or raise doubts about the presence of the disabled member shown in the summary on 15th.
Today. In the registered document it now seems as if the representing member has executed the document for himself and the disabled on 15th itself and its presentation by developer is accepted by registrar. Can this be questionable as he has no rights by p.o.a of 16th. referring Registration Requirements.
The alternations are attested by both the members. Please enlighten me. Is it allowed to alter the very executant after a document is accepted after presentation for registration.
K.S.Srinivas
(Expert) 28 October 2015
The alterations are not valid.
glen@goa
(Querist) 28 October 2015
Hearty Thank you Srinivasji,
I am confident you have strong reasons to your answer, I humbly request and am sure you will elaborate your answer at your discretion.
