Karnataka High Court
Prakash Chand Kothari vs The Sub Registrar on 25 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
WP No. 15290 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 15290 OF 2023 (GM-ST/RN)
BETWEEN:
1. PRAKASH CHAND KOTHARI,
S/O LATE SRI PUKHRAJ
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS
HAVING HIS ADDRESS AT
NO.102, I FLOOR
JALA SHAMBHAVI COMPLEX
I MAIN, GANDHINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 009.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S.R. KAMALACHARAN, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. PRADEEP S SAWKAR, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by AND:
ARUNKUMAR M S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 1. THE SUB REGISTRAR
KARNATAKA
SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA
DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BENGALURU RURAL-562110.
2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
BENGAURU RURAL DISTRICT
NO.-B, 89, 3RD FLOOR
5TH MAIN ROAD
INDUSTRIAL VASAHATHU
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
WP No. 15290 of 2023
HC-KAR
RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO THE
ENDORSEMENT DATED 15.03.2023 IN S.R.O D/520/2022-23
ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 (ANNEXURE-E); AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing the
Endorsement dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure-E) issued
by the respondent No.1 inter-alia sought for direction
to respondent No.1 to register the Sale deed produced
at Annexure-C to the writ petition.
2. Heard learned counsel Sri S.R.
Komalacharan, appearing on behalf of learned counsel
Sri. Pradeep S. Sawkar, for the petitioner and Sri.
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
HC-KAR
Mahantesh Shettar, learned Additional Government
Advocate for the respondent-State;
3. It is contended by Sri. S.R. Komalcharan,
learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to
Section 202 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and
declaration of law made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of Seth Loon Karan Sethiya vs. Ivan E.
John and others reported in AIR 1969 SC 73, and
submitted that, where the agency is created for
valuable consideration and authority is given to secure
interest of the agent and under such circumstances
the authority cannot be revoked. Accordingly, learned
counsel for the petitioner sought for interference of
this court.
4. Per contra, Sri. Mahantesh Shettar, learned
Additional Government Advocate appearing for the
respondent-State submitted that, Smt.
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
HC-KAR
Munirathnamma (original purchaser) executed power
of attorney in favour of the petitioner along with her
sons namely, Sri.B.R. Nandakumar and Sri.B. R.
Vijaykumar, therefore, sought to justify the impugned
Endorsement issued by the respondent No.1.
Accordingly, sought for dismissal the writ petition.
5. Having considered the submissions made by
the learned counsel for both parties and upon careful
examination of the records, it is seen that a
Registered Power of Attorney dated 31.07.2014
(Annexure-B) was executed by B.R. Nandakumar,
B.R. Vijayakumar and Smt. Muniratnamma in favour
of the petitioner. In the said registered Power of
Attorney, a clear recital is made regarding the
execution of the Registered Agreement of Sale dated
31.07.2014 (Annexure-C). Taking into consideration
the language employed Section 202 of the Act, so
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
HC-KAR
also, the illustration A provided for Section 202 which
reads as under:
"202. Termination of agency, where agent has an
interest in subject-matter.- Where the agent has
himself an interest in the property which forms the
subject-matter of the agency, the agency cannot, in
the absence of an express contract, be terminated
to the prejudice of such interest.
illustrations
(a) A gives authority to B to sell A's land, and to pay
himself, out of the proceeds, the debts due to hi
from A. A cannot revoke this authority, nor can it be
terminated by his insanity or death.
(b) A consigns 1,000 bales of cotton to B, who has
made advances to him on such cotton, and desires
B to sell the cotton, and to repay himself out of the
price, the amount of his own advances. A cannot
revoke this authority, nor is it terminated by his
insanity or death."
6. The said illustration makes it abundantly
clear that once an agency is created for consideration,
the authority cannot be revoked even if the principal
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
HC-KAR
becomes insane or dies. In this regard, paragraphs 5
to 7 of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
'Seth Loon Karan Sethiya' (supra) are also relevant,
wherein, it has been held that where a document itself
confers authority coupled with interest, such authority
does not terminate on the death of the executant.
7. Therefore, the reasons assigned by the
respondent No.1 in the impugned Endorsement at
Annexure- E dated 15.03.2023, issued by respondent
No.1 requires to be set aside. In the result, I pass the
following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed;
ii. The Endorsement dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure-
E) issued by respondent No. 1 is hereby set
aside. Respondent No. 1 is directed to register
the Sale Deed pertaining to the subject property
NC: 2025:KHC:48686
HC-KAR
in favour of the petitioner within one month
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this order.
SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
SB
