Power of Attorney

  1. Constitution of  — The general rule of construction of power of attorney is that it must be constructed strictly as giving only such authority as that confers expressly or by necessary implication. Muhammad Mehrban  v. Saddar-ud-Din & others 1995 SCR 274 (A) AIR 1947 Nag.17, PLD 1978 SC (AJK) 143, PLD 1980 SC (AJK) 60, referred.
  2. Power of attorney not authenticated by any of the authorities  prescribed by S. 95 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat i.e. Notray Public, any Court, Judge, Magistrate, (Pakistan) Counsel or Voice Counsel — Also does not fulfil the requirements laid down in Ss. 32 and 33 of the Registration Act — Cannot be deemed to be valid power of attorney. M. Mehrban v. Saddar-ud-Din  1995 SCR 274 (B)
  3. Power of attorney not executed in accordance with the requirements of S.95 Qanoon-e-Shahadat and Ss. 32 and 33 of the Registration Act cannot be deemed to have been executed properly. M. Mehrban v. Saddar-ud-Din & others 1995 SCR 274 (C) PLD 1994 SC (AJ&K)157 ref.
  4. Whether the subsequent power of attorney ratifes the initial proceedings conducted by the attorney — A power of attorney only gives that power which is specifically mentioned in it and it operates prospectively and not retrospectively. M. Mehrban v. Saddar-ud-Din 1995 SCR 274 (D)
  5. Compromise — Statement of counsel — If the power to do an act has not specifically given — Such an act whether compromise or otherwise is of no legal consequence — Statement made by appellants counsel was without lawful authority — Case remanded. AJK Govt. v. M. Azad Khan 2001 SCR 221 (A) AIR 1947 Bom 306, 1994 SCMR 1709, 1992 SCMR 876, PLD 1978 SC AJK 143, 1995 CLC 1541, PLD 1965 SC 106, 1992 SCR 54, 1992 SCR 69, 1999 SCR 418, PLD 1980 SC 45 ref.
  6. Challenge to — Whether attorney was competent to avail the review jurisdiction of the Custodian & writ jurisdiction of High Court — The power of attorney under challenge did not authorise the attorney to avail writ jurisdiction of the High Court — Jurisdiction before Custodian is conferred under special law known as the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1957 and writ jurisdiction is available before the High Court under the provision of the Interim Constitution Act, 1974 — Even otherwise it was noticed that grievance of the appellant was not amenable to writ jurisdiction as they are not aggrieved persons. Mardan Ali v. Abdul Aziz and 6 others 2003 SCR 467 (A)
  7. In civil cases if a suit is brought or defended by an attorney on behalf of plaintiff or defendant the recitals made in the power of attorney are to be looked into or construed every strictly — An attorney can do and perform only the acts and the actions, which have specifically been provided in the documents itself — Any jumping over or jumping out will be an illegality and the person for whom the attorney has acted will not be bound by that action. Khadam H. v. M. Azam Sati 2006 SCR 333 (B)
  8. Power of attorney was executed on 9.9.1995 — It was cancelled on 10.10.1995 — After that the attorney was not competent to transfer the land in dispute on the basis of power of attorney because it was revoked — Attorney executed the sale-deed on 10-2-1996 — On said date he was not competent to transfer the land being attorney — ‘Abtal Nama’ is a registered document — Registration is general notice to the public at large. A. Rehman v. Mst. Anayat Bibi 2006 SCR 408 (A)
  9. Question whether counsel for respondent No.2 has got authority to effect a compromise against interest of his client — No such power was given in power of attorney by the client to his counsel — Client filed affidavit that he has given authority to his counsel only for defending the writ petition — He has not given him the authority for abandoning or cancellation of his allotment — He has not given any instruction verbally for cancellation of his allotment — His counsel acted against his instructions and got the allotment cancelled — Power of attorney does not show that allottee has given power to his counsel to withdraw from the portion of allotment or surrender a portion of allotment — Held:  Counsel for appellant acted against the interest of his client and in excess of authority given to him by principal — Counsel was not competent to abandon a portion of allotment made in favour of his client — Appeal accepted — Case remanded. M. Aslam Khan v. M. Karim & another 2008 SCR 603 (A)
  10. The general rule of construction of power of attorney is that it must be construed strictly as giving only such authority that confers expressly or by necessary implication and that while interpreting such a document regard must be had to recitals of the deed which has shown object of power to control all general terms in operative part of the instrument — The object of power may control all the general terms and if the authority has been given to do a particular act proceeded by the journal words — General words are restricted to what is necessary for proper performance of a particular act and that general words do not conform general powers but are limited to the purpose for which the authority is given. M. Basharat v. Mrs. Naseem Begum and 3 others 2008 SCR 478 (A)
  11.  The power of attorney is construed to the acts which also include filing of the suit. Muhammad Basharat v. Mrs. Naseem Begum and 3 others 2008 SCR 478 (B)
  12. It is settled proposition of law that a document cannot be interpreted by isolating one recital from the other recitals of the deed. M. Basharat v. Mrs. Naseem Begum 2008 SCR 478 (C)
  13. The attorney after obtaining power of attorney transferred the land to his son — It is settled principle of law that an attorney before transferring the land to his own kith and kin has to obtain permission for the principal. Maqsood Ahmad v. Muhammad Razzaque and 9 others 2009 SCR 38 (D) 1997 SCMR 1811, NLR 2005 Civil 270, 2005 U.C.442 and 1994 SCMR 818 ref.
  14. Validity — Revocation — It’s effect when not noticed to attorney — The power of attorney executed in favour of Muhammad Hafeez was valid at the time he transferred the suit land in favour of his son Manzoor Hussain. The other fact pleaded in the suit that Muhammad Azeem revoked the power of attorney executed by him in favour of Muhammad Hafeez did not affect the right of the attorney to transfer the same to any body on the simple ground that the fact of revocation was not noticed to the attorney. Manzoor Hussain & 6 others v. Muhammad Azeem 2010 SCR 311 (A)
  15. Execution and authority under power of attorney — Scope — Power of attorney to be construed strictly — Such power would  give only the authority as it would confer expressly; or by necessary implication; and it could not empower beyond that, what it really conveyed — Most important rule for construction of power of attorney was that regard must be had to the recitals which as showing the scope and object of power, would control all general terms in the operative part of the instrument — Authority was given to do a particular act followed or proceeded by general words — General words were restricted to what was necessary for proper performance of a particular act and general words, in no way would confer general powers, but were limited to the purpose for which the authority was given — Where special powers were followed by general words and vice versa, the general words were construed as limited to what was necessary for proper exercise of special power — Power of attorney was not open to liberal interpretation; it was subject to strict interpretation because it would delegate powers which were to be interpreted in strict terms; and in such a way as would be necessary to carry into effect, the authority that was expressly given. Manzoor Begum v. Fazal Ellahi 2012 SCR 70 (A)  Khadim Hussain v. Muhammad Fazil and others 1999 YLR 1529; Messrs Mohib Exports Ltd. and 4 others v. Trust Leading Corporation Ltd. Lahore through its Chief Executive and another 2005 CLD 581; Muhammad Yasin alias Punno and 2 others v. Muhammad Yunus and 2 others, 2006 CLC 1257; Mst. Surayya Kausar v. Muhammad Asmatullah 2000 MLD 507; Muhammad Yaqub v. The Settlement Authority and others 1973 SCMR 484 and Abdul Rehman v. Mst. Khanum Bibi and another (Civil Appeal No. 66 of 2006 decided on 19-10-2010) distinguished. Muhammad Mehrban v. Shadrud Din and another 1995 CLC 1541; Gul Taj Begum v. Lal Hussain and another PLD 1980 SC (AJ&K) 60 and Ghazanfar Hussain v. Rehmat Bibi and 5 others 1989 CLC 310 rel.
  16. An attorney can exercise only those powers of perform acts which have been specifically mentioned in the power-of-attorney and nothing beyond — Principle of law. M. Hanif (Deceased) v. Mst. Zainab Bibi and 12 others 2013 SCR 413 (B)
  17. Document of — Interpretation — A power-of-attorney is a written authorization by which the principal appoints another person as his agent and confers upon him the authority to perform the specified acts on behalf of the principal — The primary purpose of an instrument of this notice is to evidence the authority the agent to third parties with whom the agents deal — This rule is now well-established that the power-of-of attorney must be strictly construed and strictly perused — A power-of-attorney is held to confer only those powers which are specified therein, and the agent may neither go beyond nor deviate from the terms of the instrument i.e. the act done should be legally identical with what is authorized to be done by the instrument. M. Hanif (Deceased) v. Mst. Zainab Bibi and 12 others 2013 SCR 413 (D)
  18. Rule of construction — Stated — The power-of-attorney must be strictly construed and strictly pursued. Muhammad Hanif (Deceased) v. Mst. Zainab Bibi and 12 others 2013 SCR  413 (C)
  19. Review — contention — that the same has been filed by an incompetent person who was not assigned any powers to file review petition. Held: there is no cavil with the proposition that while assigning the authority/power to the attorney, each and every act to be performed by the attorney must be incorporated in the power of attorney in clear terms and any power which is not assigned cannot be exercised by the attorney. Munshi Khan & 2 others v. M. Sadiq 2014 SCR 1012 (A)
  20. Interpretation of — It is celebrated principle of interpretation of the power of attorney that a power of attorney should be construed strictly and should be interpreted to give only such authority to attorney as it confers expressly or by necessary implications — The important rule for the construction of such a document is that regard must be had to the recitals, which show the object of the power — Held: A power of attorney is always subjected to strict interpretation because it delegates powers which are to be interpreted in strict terms and, in such a way, as would be necessary to carry into effect the authority that is expressly given. The power of attorney is not open to that liberal interpretation, which is given to less formal instruments such as ordinary letters or instructions in commercial transactions. WAPDA & another v. Muhammad Iqbal & 10 others 2015 SCR  35 (G) 2012 SCR 70 & 1989 CLC 310  rel.
  21. An authority can exercise only such powers which are vested in him through the power of attorney and not beyond that. WAPDA & another v. Muhammad Iqbal & 10 others 2015 SCR  35 (J)
  22. It is celebrated principle of interpretation of power of attorney that strict compliance shall be made to the recitals of power of attorney. Skindar Habib v. Shaista Jabeen & others 2015 SCR 1214 (A) PLD 1978 SC (AJ&K) 143, PLD 1980 SC (AJ&K) 60 &WAPDA vs. Mohammad Iqbal and others (Civil Appeal No. 77 of 2013  decided  on 2nd December, 2014) rel.
  23. The holder of general power of attorney in alienating the property of his principal in favour of those who are so closely related that ultimate beneficiary would be the agent himself, the consent of the principal necessary — on failure the principal is at liberty to repudiate the transaction. Khalid Mehmood v. Muhammad Rashed (deceased) through L.H 2016 SCR 830 (A)
  24. The power of attorney has to be strictly construed. Basharat Hussain v. Zohra Tabassum 2016 SCR 1397 (A) 2014 SCR 1012, 2015 SCR 35 & 1214 ref.
  25. The attorney can exercise only such powers which have been empowered upon him by the principal. Basharat Hussain v. Zohra Tabassum 2016 SCR 1397 (B)
  26. PLA/Appeal before Supreme Court — competency of — In the impugned judgment, AJ&K Council is an independent party — AJ&K Council Secretariat and the Chairman, AJ&K Council are also arrayed as parties separately — power of attorney has not been signed on behalf of AJ&K Council — according to the celebrated principle of law, the power of attorney requires strict interpretation — The power of attorney signed by AJ&K Council can only be deemed to be executed and signed on his behalf and not on behalf of any other party. Secretary AJ&K Council & another v. Sajjad Hussain Shah & 22 others 2016 SCR 1549 (D) 2015 SCR 35 rel. 
  27. –An attorney can do or perform only acts and actions which have been granted in the power of attorney. Liaqat Ali vs Mst. Sobia Naz & another 2018 SCR 1243 (A) 2006 SCR 333, 2003 SCR 467 & 2008 SCR 478 rel
  28.  —statement of counsel for withdrawal of appeal—no specific authority for giving the statement was conferred—on the learned counsel—before the High Court to make statement for withdrawal of the appeal or have it dismissed. Held: dismissal of the appeal on the statement of the counsel was not proper. Sattar Din & another v. Azad Govt. & 4 others 2020 SCR 304 (A) 1992 SCR 54 & 2001 SCR 221 rel
  29.  —declaratory suit and application under section 12(2) C.P.C. dismissed—challenge to—preliminary objection that all proceedings initiated without valid power of attorney—counsel filed power of attorney in the Supreme Court executed by the appellant herself—Held: this act cannot ratify the initial proceedings conducted by the attorney—the power of attorney operates prospectively and not retrospectively. Maroof Begum v. Kasmic Walaz Firm & 83 others  2020 SCR 577 (A) 2019 CLC   1519 ref
  30. Attestation/authentication of—  See Maroof Begum v. Kasmic Walaz Firm & 83 others  2020 SCR 577 (B)
  31. —Alienation of land by the principal himself after execution of general power of attorney—effect of—the executor of power of attorney later on, transferred the land in dispute to another person through sale deed resulting into making power of attorney invalid. Muhammad Faryad v. Zahoor Ahmed & others  2022 SCR 1123 (D)
error: Content is protected !!