Land sold for Rs 6.95 crore, sister-in-law got Rs 72 lakh; Delhi HC orders Rs 1.01 crore more plus interest

The Delhi High Court has directed a brother-in-law to pay his sister-in-law an additional Rs 1.01 crore. Along with 8% annual interest, for the unpaid share of a 26-bigha land sale in Najafgarh.

According to sources, the woman had given her brother-in-law a general power of attorney (GPA) to manage the property due to their geographical differences. However, he allegedly did not pay his sister-in-law the full amount due from the sale of the land.

The dispute began when the sister-in-law received only Rs 71.99 lakh from the transaction instead of her share of the sale proceeds. The family property dispute eventually reached court, with the woman dying intestate without leaving a Will. Her three daughters continued the legal proceedings and ultimately won before the Delhi High Court on August 31, 2026.

Advocates Vikas Arora, Ms Rashi Priya, and Vansh Arora represented the daughters in the case. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna heard the case, according to an ET report.

Those documents identified the shared woman and three others as the "Vendors" and "absolute owners/bhumidars" of the Najafgarh property. The sale deed also showed the brother-in-law executing the transaction in his capacity as a GPA holder.

Read More: Apple iPhone Launch Could Trigger Fresh Wave of Trade-Ins, Strengthening Demand for Refurbished Models

"Since a registered document is treated as speaking for itself under the Evidence Act, he could not later turn around and claim, without proof, that the land actually belonged to him and his wife alone," said Adnan Siddiqui, Partner at King Stubb and Kasiva.

Relying on the Supreme Court's court decision in Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v.

State of Haryana (2012), the court reiterated that a GPA is an instrument of agency, not a conveyance of ownership. It permits someone to act on behalf of the owner but does not itself transfer ownership to the GPA holder.

The court therefore held that the GPAs only authorised the brother-in-law to look after. Manage and supervise the shared undivided share and to sell, transfer or gift it on her behalf.

The court also found that the brother-in-law's claim that he and his wife had actually purchased the Najafgarh land with their own funds was unsubstantiated. The filed sale deed described the four women as the absolute owners/bhumidars and recorded the brother-in-law as the GPA holder.

Furthermore, the court found that the brother-in-law's income tax return showed no reflection of the Rs 6.95 crore capital gains from the sale, which further weakened his version.

That share amounted to Rs 1.73 crore. Since Rs 71.99 lakh had already been paid to her, the remaining amount payable was Rs 1,01,78,074. The court directed that 8% annual interest be paid on this outstanding amount from April 11, 2011, the date of the sale.

Also Read: AB InBev Outpaces India's Beer Market in First Half of Year, Led by Premiumisation and Cans

"They (GPAs) were not executed for any consideration, and were not coupled with any interest of the brother-in-law in the property."

The brother-in-law had said that the money paid to his sister-in-law was a friendly, interest-free loan. However, he had earlier admitted to the police officers that the payments were not made "out of any obligation".

The woman had declared the Rs 71.99 lakh paid by her brother-in-law as part of her income tax return, further undermining his version.

shared Ms Rashi Priya, one of the advocates representing the daughters.

It highlights the importance of carefully drafting and executing power of attorney documents to avoid misunderstandings and disputes in the future.