Skip to main content

Buying Property through General Power of Attorney - GPA

 The sale and purchase of property through the General Power of Attorney route has been a common menace in the Indian realty sector. Transferring property through a General Power of Attorney allows the seller to avoid stamp duty and registration charges that go along with a sale deed and similarly buyers are often offered better deals under a sale through General Power of Attorney, making it a lucrative proposition for both parties. However, as a buyer it is not advised to purchase a property through a General Power of Attorney for reasons explained further in this article.


Consult: Top Property Lawyers in India

 


What is a General Power of Attorney?

A General Power of Attorney is a legal document whereby one person authorises another to act on his/her behalf. The person authorising is referred to as the ‘principal’ and the person being authorised under the power of attorney is called an ‘agent’. A General Power of Attorney, as is evident by its name, is not drafted for a specific purpose and the agent can act on behalf of the principal on varied matters. The acts of an agent acting on the behest of a General Power of Attorney bind the principal.


A General Power of Attorney is often utilised to provide for situations wherein a person is unable to act for himself and may require another to act on his behalf. Common situations wherein a General Power of Attorney may be required are when the principal is suffering from some legal/physical disability, illness or is incapacitated to act for himself. It may also be used to cover for the principal’s absence in situations wherein he/she is required to take decisions or carry out specific tasks etc.


Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue

 


Why are property transactions based on General Power of Attorney prevalent

Sale of property through a General Power of Attorney allows sellers as well as buyers to maximise their financial gain from the transaction which would  otherwise not be possible through conveyance of the property under a sale deed. Since a sale deed requires the payment of stamp duty as well as registration charges, the parties are able to avoid this financial liability by transfer through a General Power of Attorney. Further, the seller also bears the liability of the capital gains tax on a transaction through a sale deed which is avoided by a General Power of Attorney transfer.


Apart from the financial benefits, a General Power of Attorney also allows a seller without a clear title to enter into a transaction with a buyer to transfer the said property, which would otherwise be tough through a sale deed. 


Further, it also allows for the transfer of numerous properties which could otherwise not be sold legally, such as the sale of agricultural land for residential use without converting the land use. Similarly, it allows for transactions with respect to properties allotted on a leasehold basis which are not allowed to be sold within a specified gestation period.


Consult: Top Property Lawyers in India

 


Buying property under a General Power of Attorney

There are numerous disadvantages in buying a property through a General Power of Attorney since there are many uncertainties and risks associated with it. Having understood what a General Power of Attorney is and why it is executed, it is evident that it is not an instrument intended to transfer property titles and ownership. Under no circumstance can a General Power of Attorney be used in place of a sale deed which is a valid legal instrument that transfers title and ownership in property between a seller and buyer.


Even the Hon’ble Supreme Court through an order in 2011 has clearly stated that, “a power of attorney is not an instrument of transfer in regard to any right, title or interest in an immovable property”. The court further directed municipal bodies across the nation to not register or mutate properties based on General Power of Attorney documents, except for valid cases. Thus, even upon successfully obtaining possession of a property after a transaction based on a General Power of Attorney, there might be problems in the future while selling the property. Therefore, it is against your interests as a buyer to buy a property through a General Power of Attorney.


Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue

 


Revocability of General Power of Attorney

A General Power of Attorney in most cases is revocable by nature. A General Power of Attorney is instantly revoked upon the death of the principal. Similarly, a General Power of Attorney can also be revoked by the principal anytime during his lifetime. A General Power of Attorney is irrevocable only where the holder has obtained an irrevocable power coupled with interest, which remains valid even after the death of the principal. In any other situation, a General Power of Attorney may be revoked as the law does not recognise any other form of irrevocable General Power of Attorney. Therefore, a transaction based solely on a General Power of Attorney may lead to numerous impediments in the future. 

 


Why do you need a lawyer?

Given the dubious nature of a transaction based on a General Power of Attorney, it is highly advised to engage the services of a property lawyer when faced with such an offer. Only a lawyer can help guide you through the technicalities and intricacies of the legality of such a transaction given its surrounding circumstances. A trained legal expert can best protect your interests and ensure a hassle-free purchase which does not lead to legal problems for you in the future.



Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more