File suit for partition for division of property by metes and bounds as per share mentioned in agreement
2) brother cannot claim full third floor
3) they would be entitled to parking slots on ground floor
Dispute amongst brothers for property
Hi, My grandfather inherited a property of land to 4 sons (my father and 3 uncle) and all 4 were currently living there since 1990. In 2010, my father and one uncle(chacha) purchased 1/4th share from the property of the eldest brother and registery was done in the name of 3 brothers in the ratio of 37.5%, 37.5 % and 25%. Also the same year the construction was done in full house and the current situation is as follows: Ground floor - used as parking and shop by 2 brothers who has 37.5% share each First floor - one brother who has 37.5 % share second floor -one brother who has 37.5 % share third floor - 60% area by brother who owns 25% and rest 40% area by rest of the 2 brothers. (Though his overall property share is 25% but when construction was done and the house was built from scratch brother who owns 25% did not put any money and whole money to built the house was spent by two brothers (which was approx 70 lakh) and all 3 brothers in 2010 agreed on this arragement (verbally). Though on papers third borther still had 25% overall area and rest two each had 37.5%. Here' the dispute recently. 1) Brother and his son who has 25 % overall share wants to have whole of the third floor (right now they owns 60% of third floor due to verbal agreement at the time of constructing the house) 2) They claim to have equal share on ground floor in terms of parking and shop. However both these claims are void as they did not put any construction cost in 2010 and in return of their 1/4 land they were given 60% of the third floor which is approx a 2BHK (including drawing room). The overall property is 150 square yard. Please confirm: 1) If they are entitled to claim full third floor 2) Can they claim ground floor share which is used as parking and shop 3) On papers their is no bifervation floor wise but just total area (37.5%, 37.5% and 25%) Thanks!
Asked 4 years ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
16 Answers
1. ONLY the terms & conditions that are documentarily available with proper documentary proofs are legally enforceable, during times of dispute in Court.
2. Oral Arrangements decided between brothers will not be allowed in court, for settlement of disputes and neither will "possession" criteria will be taken into consideration.
3. You are advised to have the available documentary evidences duly scrutinized, specifically by a local property lawyer, alongwith the mutated /transferred Revenue /Municipal records and further alongwith a architect's report of the property.
1. No, they are not entitled to claim full third floor, due to settlement .
2. If the parking area is common area for the building , then they can claim parking , otherwise if there is settlement for ground floor , then they cannot used the parking and shop on the ground floor.
3. Since, there is no documentary proof for floor wise , then the share is also challengable. .
- If all the brothers dont want to go Court for filing a Partition suit , then they should execute a Family Settlement ,after clearing marking the details of the property in whole, and registered the same in the office of sub-registrar.
- If not agree for family settlement , then anyone can file a suit for Partition .
This is a very complicated situation. The land has been divided into 3 parts. Now the floors have to be divided in the ratio in which the land has been divided. This can be done through a family arrangement or a partition suit can be filed. As the family arrangement can be done in view of the disputes that have arisen file a partition suit in the district court.
As per your above case being legal heirs of same property it's better you yourself decide the same through registered partition deed. The other way is partition suit which will give discretion to the court and it will decide the said share
One single solution to all the disputes can be filing of a partition suit.
Let the property distributed by the court orders.
This is a clear dispute as regards respective due share and possession to which they are not entitled to.
So remove this dispute once and for all file a suit for partition wherein the court would first declare the share and then through final decree would demarcate boundary of each share holder.
Otherwise reach to a consensus and make a amicable deed of partition to mark boundary of each one.
1. Their claim cannot be maintainable if there is an agreement in writing among the brothers about the distribution of property after the construction of the same by demolishing the original structure.
2. Based on the original partition they are entitled to a share in the ground floor also, however if there was any agreement in writing on the developed building then their claim may not be sustainable.
3. If that is the cae then they are entitled to a share in the ground floor too, however you may amicably settle the issue instead of going for a stretched legal battle over this dispute.
They have 1/4th share in land. So in over all building, they can claim 1/4th share.
60% on 3rd floor may equivalent to 1/4th of over all building and no contribution in construction. So no specific claim in portion of building.
They have right to park vehicle but no claim in shop.
Present oral partition is valid in the eye of law. Refuse their claim.
1. See based on the documents they can file suit for partition for seeking equal share of equal value in ground floor and in rest of the building.
As below are shops as commercial property and above it is residential so.in both they may contest for the equal share.
Your father and other brother may contest same based on the family settlement though evidence of same need to be brought before court .
It is undivided share of interest. It is to settled either mutual settlement deed or by partition by metes and bound. Otherwise dispute will continue.
The Indian Contract Act 1872, section 2(e), defines an agreements as "every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other is an agreement.
Oral agreements, on the other hand, consists of words, gestures, symbols by which one party conveys a promise or a set of promises to another, which, on acceptance by the other party, becomes a valid oral agreement. Valid oral agreements are legally enforceable in the court of law. An oral agreement is as equally valid, as a written one. The legality, of an oral agreement, cannot be questioned, if it falls under the ambit of the requirements stated in section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
After the perusal of recitals in the purchase deed subsequent agreement only can advice properly.
As per your query the other tow brothers have 40% share in Third floor. So he cannot claim full third floor. Even though he can claim a parking slot in the ground floor.
File a suit for partition is the solution when the disputes are not settled amicably
file a partition suit in the court with showing demarcation of holding of the property and pray before the court for appointment of advocate commissioner for deriving the partition effective and thereafter have the same registered as per the registration act..
1. Yes they can claim full third floor as it is 25% of total area.
2. No they cannot claim share in ground floor if they take complete third floor but they can only use ground floor for Parking their vehicles as it is common area.
1) No they are not entitled to claim full third floor.
2) Yes, they are entitled to Parking Slot in Ground Floor proportionate to their share.
File suit for partition as per the Oral Agreement, for allotting the shares as per the understanding by diving the property in metes and bounds.
The same should solve the problem once for all without there being any complications for next generations of your family.
- As per the information mentioned in the present query, makes it clear that there has been a settlement on paper for having the above percent of the property.
- I would like to apprise you that what has been stated on the paper, will only be survive before the court of law.
- If happen to have reply upon the oral agreement then the whole situation and statement of all will be important.
- No, even if go by the oral or written arrangement, he cannot have equal on third floor and not even in the parking etc.