Any document executed in India requires to be attested by two witnesses. Witnesses are required only to vouch for the identity of the executant and his/her act of signing the document in their presence. Documents executed abroad if attested by the Indian High Commission is exempted from this general rule, as the purpose of witnessing the document is served by the High Commission attesting it. The Registration Act is clear about adjudication of documents executed abroad. The relevant term is adjudication, meaning assessing the document for payment of stamp duty, and NOT registration per se. Please engage a competent advocate locally and ask him/her to present your case properly before the sub-registrar. If everything fails, only a Writ needs to be filed at the Madras HC seeking directions to the sub-registrar for adjudication of the document duly executed abroad.

There is no such rule. The PoA executed abroad can be sent to the power-agent directly by the principal living abroad by courier or post. The sub-registrar may enquire when it was received in India only to verify the fact that the application for adjudication was filed within the time-limit prescribed under the Registration Act for adjudication. A piece of evidence is the envelope containing the postal stamp in India. If sent by DHL or some other courier, the proof of delivery from the courier will serve the purpose.

In your case, as you brought the document personally from abroad, your passport entry into India will serve the purpose.

You are dealing with a very typical ground-level problem—a legally valid document being resisted by the Sub-Registrar on procedural expectations which are often not backed by law. Let me address this calmly but precisely, so you know both your legal position and the practical way forward.

1. Validity of your Power of Attorney executed abroad

Your POA has gone through the following stages:

• Executed before a Notary Public in Malaysia
• Attested by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Malaysia
• Authenticated by the High Commission of India, Kuala Lumpur

This is more than sufficient compliance under Indian law.

Under the Powers of Attorney Act, 1882, and settled legal position:

• A POA executed outside India and authenticated by a Consular Officer of India is presumed to be duly executed
  
• Such authentication carries a statutory presumption of validity
  

Therefore, legally speaking, your POA is perfectly valid and admissible in India.

2. Requirement of two witnesses — is it mandatory?

This is where the Sub-Registrar is overreaching.

• There is no universal statutory requirement under the Powers of Attorney Act that a POA must have two witnesses
• Witness requirement may arise in specific types of documents (like Wills, certain deeds), but not as a blanket rule for POA

More importantly:

• When a POA is authenticated by the Indian Consulate, that authentication itself substitutes the need for further proof of execution
• Courts, including the Kerala High Court judgment you referred to, have clearly held that consular authentication is sufficient
  

So, the objection regarding absence of witnesses is not legally sustainable, though it is unfortunately a common administrative objection.

3. Registration vs Adjudication — an important distinction (often missed)

In Tamil Nadu, a foreign-executed POA is typically:

• First adjudicated (for stamp duty) under the Indian Stamp Act
• Then used for execution/registration of the main document (here, relinquishment deed)

The Sub-Registrar sometimes mixes up:

• Requirements for Indian-executed documents, and
• Requirements for foreign-authenticated documents
  

Your document falls in the second category.

4. The “sealed envelope / courier from abroad” requirement

There is no provision in any central law (including the Registration Act, 1908 or Stamp Act) which mandates that:

• A POA executed abroad must be sent in a sealed envelope, or
• It must be opened in front of the Sub-Registrar

This is not a statutory requirement.

What you are encountering is an administrative practice followed in some districts to avoid allegations of tampering. However:

• Such practice cannot override statutory law
  
• Personal carriage of the document is perfectly valid

So, legally:

• Your collecting the document personally from Malaysia is absolutely valid
  
• The “sealed cover” insistence has no binding legal basis
  

5. Why the Sub-Registrar is insisting (practical reality)

From experience, these objections usually arise due to:

• Fear of audit objections
• Lack of clarity on foreign-executed documents
• A tendency to follow “safe side” practices rather than legal position

So while you are legally correct, the resistance is procedural, not substantive.

6. Practical remedies — what will actually work

You have three workable options, in increasing order of firmness:

(a) Written Representation (First Step — strongly recommended)
Submit a written representation to the Sub-Registrar stating:

• The POA is duly authenticated by the Indian High Commission
• Under law, no witness is required once consular authentication exists
• There is no legal requirement of sealed envelope transmission

Attach:

• Copy of the POA
• Copy of consular attestation
• Copy of the Kerala High Court judgment (for persuasive value)

Often, once something is put in writing, the officer becomes more cautious and may relent.

(b) Approach the District Registrar (Appellate Authority)
If the Sub-Registrar still refuses:

• File a complaint/appeal before the District Registrar
  
• They have supervisory control and can direct acceptance

This route is effective in many cases.

(c) Writ Petition before High Court
If the refusal is formal and recorded:

• You can file a writ petition seeking direction to accept and act upon the POA
  
• Courts generally take a strict view against such unnecessary procedural hurdles

Given your facts, you have a strong case for relief.

7. One practical suggestion (without conceding legal position)

If time is critical and you want to avoid litigation:

• You may consider executing a confirmatory witness affidavit in India or
• A ratification letter from the principal, if feasible

This is not legally required, but sometimes helps in clearing administrative hurdles quickly.

8. Final position

• Your POA is legally valid and enforceable
  
• 
  Two witnesses are not mandatory in your case
• Sealed envelope/courier requirement has no legal basis
• The Sub-Registrar’s objection is administrative, not legal
  

If handled firmly but tactfully—starting with a written representation—you should be able to get this accepted without restarting the entire process.

If you want, I can draft a precise representation to the Sub-Registrar or District Registrar quoting the correct legal provisions and case law, which usually resolves such issues efficiently.