P L D 2013 Supreme Court 190 (PLP)

MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J.

Petitioners-pre-emptors have lost their cause of pre-emption before all the three forums below on the reasoning that they have not been able to prove Talb-i-Ishhad. It may be pertinent to mention here that the petitioners had filed a suit for pre-emption through their attorney. Same is the position with respect to the issuance of Talb-i-Ishhad which was through the attorney of the petitioners and not by themselves. The learned Courts below, by holding that the power of attorney of the agent, does not empower him to make Talb-i-Ishhad by issuing a notice in the context of section 13 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991, has dismissed the suit.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners by making reference to the power of attorney (Exh.P1) dated 8-5-1994 has argued that the same (power of attorney) authorizes the agent, the attorney of the petitioners, to institute a suit and such authority shall include ancillary and incidental powers/authority given by the principal, qua the issuance of notice of Talb-i-Ishhad as well.

3. Heard. It is a settled law that the power of attorney should be construed strictly and only such powers, which are expressly and specifically mentioned in the power of attorney, must be exercised by the agent as considered to have been delegated to him (for reference see PLD 2002 SC 71). We have examined Exh.P1 and find that there is no mention at all, empowering the agent to issue the notice of Talb-i-Ishhad rather it is only restricted to the institution of the suit for pre-emption and matters incidental thereto (the suit). According to section 14 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991 "Demand by guardian or agent.--Where a person is unable to make demands under section 13, his guardian or agent may make the required demands on his behalf". Thus from the afore-stated mandate of law, though the power of making Talbs can be delegated to an agent, but such power must be conferred specifically and in express terms and that too before making of Talbs. If there is no express authority, as aforementioned, such lapse cannot be made up by the principal subsequently on the principle of ratification under the law of agency.

4. In a case involving akin facts, the Lahore High Court in the dictum Nawab Ali through General Attorney v. Javaid Iqbal Nabi and others (PLD 2009 Lahore 49) has held as follows:-- "The argument that because the power to file a suit for pre-emption is given to him in the general power of attorney dated 28-9-1998 (Exh.P5), therefore it should necessarily be read to include the power of making the Talbs, is not correct, because it is the settled law, that a power of attorney should be construed strictly and under the rule of interpretation of the documents, which is akin to the principles about the interpretation of law, nothing should be read therein. The authority to file the suit for the pre-emption clearly meant the institution in its legal context i.e. signing verification and the presentation of the plaint and the engaging of the counsel, but by no stretch of interpretation, it can be held that the petitioner has given the power to his attorney to make the Talbs." The above is the correct and apt exposition of the law, which is hereby fully endorsed and the instant case is squarely covered thereby.

5. In the light of the above, we do not find that a valid Talb-i-Ishhad was made by the petitioners, therefore, their claim of pre-emption has been rightly dismissed by the Courts below. Hence, these petitions are dismissed. Leave refused. MWA/U-2/S Petitions dismissed.