Is non-production of a PoA fatal to title?

Not by itself. A duly registered sale deed carries a presumption of correctness. It must be rebutted with strong evidence.

Who carries the burden to rebut the sale deed presumption?

The party challenging the deed. They must bring convincing evidence to show the deed is incorrect or invalid.

Did the Supreme Court uphold the High Court’s decree?

Yes. The Court agreed that the registered deeds and endorsement supported the plaintiffs’ title and the defendants gave no strong rebuttal.

What did the endorsement on the deed signify?

It acknowledged the attorney relationship and supported the conveyance. In absence of contrary proof, it aided the presumption.

What relief followed from these findings?

Plaintiff was entitled to recover the land by removing obstructions. The suit, as decreed by the High Court, stood affirmed.

Manik Majumder v. Dipak Kumar Saha

Supreme Court of India 2023 • SCC OnLine SC 37 Bench: SC Property • Registration • Evidence ~6–8 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi • India • Published: 01 Nov 2025 • Slug: manik-majumder-v-dipak-kumar-saha

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court. A registered sale deed carries a presumption of correctness. Here, the endorsement on the deed recognized the attorney relationship and the conveyance. The defendants gave no strong evidence to rebut this. The plaintiffs’ title and right to recover the property were affirmed.

CASE_TITLE: Manik Majumder v. Dipak Kumar Saha PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: registered sale deed, PoA validity, title proof SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: presumption, Registration Act 1908, burden of rebuttal, SCC OnLine SC 37 PUBLISH_DATE: 01 Nov 2025 AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi LOCATION: India

```

Issues

Is non-production of the Power of Attorney fatal to the plaintiffs’ title?
Have the plaintiffs proved right, title, and interest in the suit property?

Rules

Once a document is duly registered, a presumption of correctness arises.
This presumption is rebutted only by strong, convincing evidence to the contrary.
An endorsement on the sale deed can be determinative proof of conveyance and of attorney authority, especially when the challenger shows no independent title.
The onus to disprove the deed lies on the party who challenges it.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline for Manik Majumder v. Dipak Kumar Saha

Original Owner

Property belonged to Braja Mohan Dey.

1968 — PoA

Dey, then in East Pakistan (Bangladesh), allegedly gave a PoA to D.C. Saha.

03 Sep 1968 — Sale

Using the PoA, Saha sold the property to himself; later sold Schedule A to his wife Gita Rani Saha (29 Sep 1968).

Consideration said to include repayment of ₹20,000; ₹10,000 allegedly passed to Dey.

Dispute

Defendants occupied the land; challenged the PoA and the deeds as invalid/unregistered.

Courts Below

Trial Court and First Appeal: suit dismissed for non-production and non-proof of PoA.

High Court

Reversed: drew statutory presumptions from registration and endorsement; upheld plaintiffs’ title.

Supreme Court

Appeal dismissed. High Court judgment affirmed.

Arguments

Appellants (Defendants)

PoA was neither produced nor proven; sales are void.
Registration cannot cure lack of authority.

Respondents (Plaintiffs)

Deeds were registered; endorsement shows attorney authority and title passed.
Opponents offered no strong rebuttal or independent title.

Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It held that the High Court rightly relied on the presumption from registration and the endorsement on the deed. Since the defendants gave no credible contrary evidence, the plaintiffs’ title and recovery were confirmed.

Ratio

A registered deed is presumed correct unless rebutted by strong evidence.
An endorsement on the sale deed can confirm attorney authority and conveyance.
The burden to dislodge the presumption lies on the party challenging the deed.

Why It Matters

The case protects the stability of registered transactions. It warns that mere doubts about a PoA are not enough—proof is needed to defeat a registered deed and a clear endorsement.

Key Takeaways

Registration creates a legal presumption.
Endorsements can clinch authority and title.
The challenger must bring solid rebuttal evidence.
Without rebuttal, title stands and possession can be recovered.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: REG → ENDORSE → REBUT

REG: Registered deed = presumption.
ENDORSE: Endorsement supports authority and title.
REBUT: Only strong evidence can defeat it.

IRAC Outline

Issue

Does non-production of PoA defeat title? Have plaintiffs proved right, title, and interest?

Rule

Registered deed presumption; endorsement as determinative evidence; burden on challenger to rebut with strong proof.

Application

Deeds were registered and endorsed. Defendants produced no convincing contrary proof. Presumption remained.

Conclusion

Plaintiffs’ title upheld; right to recover property affirmed; appeal dismissed.

Glossary

Registered Deed Presumption: Legal assumption that a registered document is valid unless disproved by strong evidence.
Power of Attorney (PoA): A document that authorizes one person to act for another in specified matters.
Endorsement: An official note on the deed that records key facts (e.g., identity/authority) and supports the transaction.