Civil law
Swapnil
(Querist) 25 February 2012
This query is : Resolved
Hello sir,
The person 'A' was ready to sold his land to 'B', Where 'B' paid him token amount also but before the sale deed 'A' sold his land to 'C'. Now 'B' filed a case against 'A' & 'C'. When the matter was in lower court 'C ' sold that land to 'D'. now the stay was given by lower court on that land. whether 'C' has right to appeal by saying he has right under sec52 of Transfer of property Act 1882. as 'C' sold his land all rights and interest are over. so does he has any right to make an Appeal in High court.
Kindly guide me.
Regards
swapnil
Chanchal Nag Chowdhury
(Expert) 25 February 2012
The right of C to prefer an appeal flows from the fact that he is a party to the proceeding. Whether he will succeed or not is a different matter.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 25 February 2012
swapnil
The person 'A' was ready to sold his land to 'B', BUT NOT SOLD IT.
Where 'B' paid him token amount, BECOMES IRRELEVENT AS against C & D as NOT AGREED TO SALE, no sale deed or agr.
A sold his land to 'C'.
Now 'B' filed a case against 'A' & 'C'. When the matter was in lower court 'C ' sold that land to 'D'.
now the stay was given by lower court on that land. MEANS A STATUS QUO?? AFTER THE CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP TO D.
Now 'C' has neither Land , nor anything that affect him. He is no more in picture.
C had no knowledge of deal with B, and is immune. He is a bonafide purchaser.
C already sold to D . He too is a bonafide purchaser.
Why should he appeal?? He has nothing to loose or gain!!.Only A is liable to B, if at all, for monetary loss.
Any Final judgment of Court shall be binding.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 25 February 2012
from the facts of case mentioned by you it appears that sale by C was in contravention of court order restraining the sale and directing maintenance of status quo . if sale has been made subsequent to court order it is contempt of court .
if however sale was made prior to court order then C ought to have pointed out to court that third party rights have been created in the case .
since c is party to suit proceedings he ought to file appeal against the order
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 25 February 2012
Most probably it's a suit for specific performance + declaration of illegality of sale to C + possession.
Specific Performance - it's an established principle can be sought even against person claiming from original seller. However if if C was a bona fide purchaser of property for value (as in not under a gift) without any knowledge of transaction with B. He is immune from specific performance.
However if he did know - he holds the property in constructive trust for B and is amenable to Specific Performance.
He being a necessary party to the suit, any adverse order that is made against his interest, he can appeal.
You've not talked about who holds the possession, which is of profound importance in such cases.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 25 February 2012
The person 'A' was ready to sold his land to 'B', BUT NOT SOLD IT.
A sold his land to 'C'.
but before the sale deed 'A' sold his land to 'C'. Now 'B' filed a case against 'A' & 'C'.
Implies, B filing suit after the sale to C.
These statement of Swapnil are vital.
Possession must be with D now.
Under the circumstances,even D would have been necessary party too.
As D is not a Party, D can sell it to E too.
What remedy and relief B get against all?? Only monetary, that too against A only.
Any Agreement of A with B , if unregistered is no evidence to prove any title, right or interest in property of C or D.
N.K.Assumi
(Expert) 25 February 2012
Suugestions given by V R Shroff has weight, as D is in present possession of the sale property, and as rightly pointed out by him, D can even sale the same to E:The pertinent question is whether C was aware of the Court's stay order when he sold the land to D? But regarding the inadmissibility of documents for want of registration,I am of the view that even though the deed is not registered, yet,the contract itself can be enforced against A.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 25 February 2012
A purchaser is expected to be more vigilant than the seller and he has to obtain all necessary information from all known and even unknown sources about the genuineness of title of the seller prior to his purchase which is missing in the present case so C cannot shelter of his bonafide purchaser and moreover he has sold the property during the pendancy of the suit so D can never become bonafide purchaser in this chain.
No right accrues in favour of C to appeal as desired.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 25 February 2012
According to me, B only paid money, he never entered into any Agreement, nor regd it.
So A sold it to C,
Thereafter B files suit for injunction.
There are many, who pay Rs. 1 lakh token for the land costing 2 cr, wait till he get a purchaser for 3 cr, and try to get profit of 1 cr for investment of 1L. They take years and as soon as they came to know A sold it to C, rush to court, to get their cut of over 50 L. The Land owner suffer, don't get his amount, and Middleman B try to get biggest amt of profit.
B goes to level to stop constructions,sale of flats and shops , create more problem, and if possible , try to get 3 cr out of his 1L .
So to protect genuine purchaser and seller, Law compel Registered Documents only be produced as Evidence.
Bonafide purchaser C gets justice, protected, and don't have to be victim of black mail of B. who intentionally plan to cheat.
B only get back his money with interest, that's all. He cannot claim Property.
All such cases ends with out of court settlement.
This mode of operendi is the biggest money making racket now a days and majority Landed Property in litigation. This is a very serious matter.
One has to face Litigation: No escape.
Pay and buy peace.
