In Brief
A widow agreed to sell land to defendants on November 5, 2004, through her son Dhanwant Singh as her attorney-in-fact, paying earnest money. She later ratified his authority by executing a power of attorney. The trial court decreed specific performance; the first appellate court upheld this. However, the High Court reversed, denying specific performance because no power of attorney existed on the agreement date. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in second appeal: it cannot reverse concurrent findings of fact, even if erroneous. Since the defendants accepted earnest money from the son, they cannot deny his authority. The Court restored the first appellate decree, granting the plaintiff two months to pay balance consideration, after which defendants must execute the sale deed.",
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.