Skip to content
rawlaw unfiltered legal news
  • Home
  • News
  • Videos
  • Bookmarks
  • Profile
  • facebook.com
  • twitter.com
  • t.me
  • instagram.com
  • youtube.com

Property Law

Home - Property Law

Supreme-Court-Holds-Power-of-Attorney-Holder-Must-Comply-with-Mandatory-Authentication-Requirements-Under-Registration-Law-An-Agent-Never-Becomes-the-Executant-Merely-by-Signing-on-Behalf-of-Principal
Posted inNews

Supreme Court Holds Power of Attorney Holder Must Comply with Mandatory Authentication Requirements Under Registration Law: “An Agent Never Becomes the Executant Merely by Signing on Behalf of Principal”

Court’s Decision The Supreme Court in this case dealt with the crucial legal question concerning the registration of sale deeds executed through a power of attorney. The Court held that…
Posted by Rawlaw July 16, 2025
Karnataka-High-Court-Rejects-Title-Claim-Based-Solely-on-Revenue-Records-Mere-Entries-in-Revenue-Records-Do-Not-Establish-Ownership-and-Cannot-Override-Legal-Title-in-Immovable-Property-Matters
Posted inNews

Karnataka High Court Rejects Title Claim Based Solely on Revenue Records: “Mere Entries in Revenue Records Do Not Establish Ownership and Cannot Override Legal Title in Immovable Property Matters”

Court’s Decision The High Court of Karnataka dismissed the Regular Second Appeal, affirming the First Appellate Court's judgment which had set aside the Trial Court’s decree declaring the plaintiff as…
Posted by Rawlaw June 23, 2025
Chhattisgarh-High-Court-Sets-Aside-Appellate-Court-Decree-Granting-Possession-in-Ancestral-Property-Dispute—The-burden-to-prove-self-acquired-property-lies-on-the-person-who-asserts-such-acquisition
Posted inNews

Chhattisgarh High Court Sets Aside Appellate Court Decree Granting Possession in Ancestral Property Dispute—”The burden to prove self-acquired property lies on the person who asserts such acquisition.”

Court’s Decision The Chhattisgarh High Court, in SA No. 378 of 1992, allowed the second appeal preferred by the defendants and set aside the judgment and decree dated 08.08.1992 passed…
Posted by Rawlaw June 17, 2025

Recent News

  • “Comparable Sale Instances Must Prevail” – Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation After Finding Reference Court Erred in Ignoring Higher Valuation Evidence
  • “Arbitration Award Set Aside: Bombay High Court Slams ‘Denial of Natural Justice’ and Declares ‘An Arbitrator Must Give Reasons’ in a Powerful Ruling on Fundamental Policy Breach”
  • “Recovery Certificate Invalidated: Bombay High Court Issues a Powerful Warning That ‘Reasons Are the Soul of Justice’ While Reiterating That ‘A Registrar Must Apply His Mind Before Enforcing Recovery’”
  • Bombay High Court Declares That “A Clean Document Cannot Coexist With a Tainted Transaction,” Sets Aside Conviction After Finding Critical Contradictions in Evidence
  • Recovery Certificate under Section 101 Set Aside: Bombay High Court Holds That “Recording of Reasons Is a Fundamental Requirement” and Directs Denovo Inquiry for Non-Compliance with Rule 86A–86F
Copyright 2025 — Raw Law. All rights reserved.
Scroll to Top