1) file Police complaint of cheating , criminal breach of trust against the sellers under section 406,420 of IPC

2) also file suit for specific performance against seller to direct seller to execute registered sale deed in your favour

Sale is by 3 joint owners of the property

2) there are 10buyers of the property

3) there are other buyers besides one of the the seller

4) they can sue the sellers to execute registered sale deed

1. It appears that you have two questions being (i) whether it is a valid contract or not and (ii) can you sue the sellers for not registering the property after receiving payment towards consideration for the said sale.

2. Strictly speaking ordinarily a seller can not be and need not be the buyer of his own property.

3. However, when an undivided jointly held property (or a partitioned property of which the said individual is not the owner) is sold to an association of person or collection of bodies, then the said individual can be part of the said association or collection of bodies and as such he is not buying his own property himself.

4. So, the said sale is valid.

5. You can lodge a police complaint against the sellers for cheating you by refusing to register the property after collecting the consideration.

6. You can also file a Money Suit claiming direction upon the said persons to register the said property within 10 days, damage and cost.

1. The said person is the owner of 5/3 rd share of the undivided land being 1.66 acres where as he is buying only his individual share of 0.1 acres of the land in the collective purchase of 1 acre of land from the total 5 acres of land.

2. So, since the property is undivided, he can buy other's share of the land being in the group of the said 10 parsons.

3. The said deal is valid.

1. This is partly valid agreement. The seller can't become buyer of his own property. I wonder why your advocate didn't warn you on this.

2. Anyway you can lodge complaint of cheating against the sellers.

3. Alternatively file suit for specific performance of contract.

4. This time consult with an advocate.

1. Yes, it is valid agreement. For eg., GPA holder of Vendor sell the property to himself.

2. You can file a suit for Specific Performance, after issuing the notice

The conditions to prove such suits are as follows:

SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT- PRACTICAL PROBLEMS

INTRODUCTORY:-

Specific performance is a remedy developed by principle of equity. A party to a contract who is damaged because the contract is breached by another party has the option to file a suit for specific performance compelling to perform his part of contract. Before an equity court will compel specific performance, however, the contract must be one which can be specifically performed. Section 16 (c) of the Act envisages that plaintiff must plead and prove that he had performed or has always been ready and willing to perform the essential terms of the contract which are to be performed by him, other than those terms the performance of which has been prevented or waived by the defendant. In our country, most of the specific performance suits relate to sales of immoveable properties and to some extent, transfer of shares. As the law of specific performance is basically founded on equity, considerations such as conduct of the plaintiff, the element of hardship that may be caused to one of the parties, the availability of adequate alternative relief and such other matters are taken into consideration. It is a discretionary relief.

SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE:

Illustration

A is owner of land. He executed an unregistered agreement of sale in favour of B and received Rs. 50,000/- as an advance out of sale price of Rs.1,00,000/-. A has to execute a Regd. Sale deed within three months from date of execution of agreement of sale. But, A refused to execute Regd. Sale deed and sold the said property to C for higher price. B can sue against A for specific performance.

From the above illustration, no doubt, B can file a suit for specific performance. This case involve several aspects such as, whether plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of contract or not; when would time is essence of contract?; Can C be impleaded in the suit as party? Is escalation of price is a ground in such a suit? Question of Lis Pendens; whether B is entitled for damages and compensation or not; whether an unregistered agreement of sale is admissible or not etc. All these aspects are dealt in the following paragraphs with relevant illustrations.

ELEMENTS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN A SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF SUIT:-

Valid Contract :-

Normally, suit for specific performance of contract based on agreement of sale. Vague and uncertain agreement could not be given effect to.(Vimlesh Kumari Kulshrestha vs Sambhajirao, 2008 (2) Supreme 127). It was observed in Ambica Prasad vs Naziran Bibi, AIR 1939 All 64], [Balram v Natku, AIR 1928 PC 75 that there should be a valid contract for suit for specific performance of contract.

Unregistered agreement of sale :-

Un registered agreement of sale is admissible in evidence under Section 49(c) of the Registration Act in a suit for specific performance of contract. Unregistered sale deed is admissible in evidence in a suit for specific performance.(S.Kaladevi vs V.R.Somasundaram, AIR 2010 SC 1654).

Conduct of the parties:-

Any person seeking benefit of specific performance of contract must manifest that his conduct has been blemishless (H.P.Pyarejan vs Dasappa, AIR 2006 SC 1144). Similarly, conduct of defendant cannot be ignored (Silvey vs Arun Varghese, AIR 2008 SC 1568). The relief of specific performance is discretionary (V.R.Sudhakara Rao vs T.V.Kameswari, (2007) 6 SCC 650). It was held in Aniglase Yohannan v. Ramlatha, 2005 (7) SCC 534 that if the pleadings manifest that the conduct of the plaintiff entitles him to get the relief on perusal of the plaint he should not be denied the relief.

Readiness and Willingness:-

Section 16(c) of the Act mandates the plaintiff to aver in the plaint and establish the fact by evidence aliunde that he has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Distinction between “readiness” and “willingness” is that the former refers to financial capacity and the latter to the conduct of the Plaintiff wanting performance ((2011)1SCC429). The plaintiff’s readiness and willingness, which is a condition precedent, must be in accordance with the terms of the agreement (Bala Krishna vs Bhgawan Das, AIR 2008 SC 1786), however, the plaintiff need not carry money in his hand (M.K.Watts vs Usha Sharma, AIR 2004 P&H 295). In a suit for specific performance, plaintiff is to approach Court with clean hands.(G.Jayashree vs Bhagawan Das, AIR 2009 SC 1749). Right from the date of the execution till date of the decree he must prove that he is ready and has always been willing to perform his part of the contract.( N.P. Thirugnanam v. Dr. R. Jagan Mohan Rao and Ors, (1995) 5 SCC 115 at para 5). Even subsequent purchaser is entitled to raise objection as to readiness and willingness.(AIR 2009 SC 2157). To know the consequences in the case of absence of plea of readiness and willingness in the plaint, see ruling J.P. Builders and Anr.

Vs. A. Ramadas Rao and Anr, (2011)1SCC429).

Time is essence of contract:-

From the decision of a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Chand Rani v.Kamal Rani MANU/SC/0285/1993 : 1993 (1) SCC 519, it is clearly known that in the case of sale of immovable property, time is never regarded as the essence of the contract. An intention to make time the essence of the contract must be expressed in unequivocal language. As to the point of limitation is concerned, the suit for specific performance has to be filed within reasonable time which depends upon facts and circumstances of each case.(AIR 2009 SC 2157, Azhar Sultana’s case). Even if it is not of the essence of the contract, the Court may infer that it is to be performed in a reasonable time if the conditions are: 1. from the express terms of the contract; 2. from the nature of the property; and 3. from the surrounding circumstances, for example: the object of making the contract.( Smt. Chand Rani (dead) by LRs. Vs. Smt. Kamal Rani (dead) by LRs, 1993 (1) SCC 519)

Adding parties in specific performance suit:-

Order 1 Rule 10 CPC is wider than the scope of Order 22 Rule 10 CPC as to person whose presence before the court is necessary or proper for effective adjudication of the issue involved in the suit. . Order 22 Rule 10 CPC is an enabling provision and that it has certain parameters to continue the suit where right to sue is survival. Order 22, Rule 10, C.P.C. speaks of cases of an assignment, creation or devolution of any interest during the pendency of a suit and the suit may, by leave of the Court, be continued by or against the person to or upon whom such interest has come or devolved. (See the ruling Lingaraja Mohanty vs Binodini Mohanty & Ors. on 20 April, 2011; Thomson Press (India) Ltd. Vs. Nanak Builders and Investors P. Ltd. and Ors, 2013(3)SCALE26).

Essential elements to constitute ‘Lis Pendens’ :-

Answer:- Section 52 of T.P.Act delas with ‘Lis Pendens’. In order to constitute a lis pendens the following elements must be present :-(I) There must be a suit or proceeding pending in a Court of competent jurisdiction; (II) The suit or proceeding must not be collusive; (III) The litigation must be one in which right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question; (IV) There must be a transfer of or otherwise dealing with the property in dispute by any party to the litigation; (V) Such transfer must affect the rights of the other party that may ultimately accrue under the terms of the decree or order.

Hello,

A share of a property can not be sold without the partition of the property and as such such sale becomes void if 1 acre out of 5 acre is being sold to you without any division of the property.

Also, note that the seller can definitely buy a partnof the land alongwith you but consideration has to be paid by him amd division of property is mandatory

You may sue them and recover the money that has been paid to them by you.

Regards

Dear Client,

Y u insist upon the validity of agreement. Even if it is invalid for this point that vendor/ purchaser same, than this much part only be held invalid not the whole agreement.

Sue for specific performance of sale agreement.

It is not required that all the parties joined as parties to sue, rest effected parties can approach the court.

Same person could not have been the buyer and seller at the same time. This is an absurd position.

Approach the Police and lodge a FIR against the proposed sellers and get them booked for the fraud played by them.

First of all you should understand the law involved in it.

A seller cannot be a buyer.

The said person is part of the vendor and he again jumps into part of buyer.

This may not be possible to take part in both the sides in a single transaction.

Therefore the sale agreement itself may not be valid.

If they are not willing to come forward to keep up their commitment, you may send a legal notice advising them to perform their part of contract while you are willing and ready to perform your side contract.

This may followed by a suit for specific performance of contract, however the legal validity and maintainability of this case may have to discussed with your advocate properly before filing the case.

Sir, Is it valid because the seller is also a buyer in this case. Can we sue them?

Since it is in doubt whether the agreement or the transaction is valid or not due to the given situation, You may first issue a legal notice demanding the performance of their side contract and alternately demand them to return the money paid with interest if they are not willing to proceed with the sale agreement.