Registration was necessary ABC n D unless D not release his share in favor of ABC. title is not disputed but in availing bank loans, resell may face problem.
Compromise decree expiry
Can you please provide your views on my below concern In 1980, A, B, C, and D purchased two acres of land together. In 1999, D filed a lawsuit against A, B, and C. In 2001, the Bangalore magistrate court issued a compromise decree in which D agreed to accept 4 lakhs in cash instead of the 8 lakhs he had originally asked for. The court also ordered the land to be registered within 15 days, but this did not happen. Instead, the land was divided into 60-70 plots and sold to various people, including Party E. The sale deeds mentioned the case number from the lawsuit. Party E has paid all property taxes since 2001. I would like to know if Party F can buy the land from Party E. Are there any potential issues that could arise in the future?
Asked 2 years ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
10 Answers
You can purchase the plot from E
there should be indemnity clause in sale deed to indemnify you in event of third party claims are made
It is to be seen as to how and which ration plots were distributed between A, B, C, D and in which ratio? It is also to be seen that what was mode or document executed between A to D for distribution of plots and whether document was registered? Were necessary enteries were carried and made in revenue records? If genuine owner having clear title have executed sale deed in favour of E and necessary mutation was also carried then there would be no issue for F to purchase plot from E.
Dear Client
Compromise Decree: The compromise decree issued by the Bangalore magistrate court in 2001 is a legally binding document. It specified that D agreed to accept 4 lakhs in cash instead of the 8 lakhs initially sought. The court also ordered the land to be registered within 15 days.
Non-Registration of Land: Since the land was not registered as per the court order within 15 days, there may be issues related to the compliance with the court's decree.
Subdivision and Sale: The subdivision of the land into multiple plots and the subsequent sale of those plots to various individuals, including Party E, could potentially raise legal issues. The sale deeds mentioning the case number from the lawsuit may indicate that there is a legal dispute associated with the land.
Property Taxes: Party E has been paying property taxes since 2001. This may establish their possession or claim to the property, but it does not necessarily resolve the legal complexities arising from the compromise decree and the subsequent sale of the land.
Party F's Purchase: If Party F is interested in buying the land from Party E, they should conduct thorough due diligence, including a title search and verification of all legal documents associated with the property. This will help identify any potential legal issues or encumbrances on the land.
Potential Issues: There are several potential issues that could arise in the future, including challenges related to the validity of the compromise decree, the court's order for land registration, and the subdivision and sale of the land without proper registration. Party F should be aware of these potential issues and seek legal advice to assess the risks involved.
It's crucial for Party F to consult with a qualified property lawyer in India who can review all relevant documents, assess the legal status of the land, and provide guidance on whether it is advisable to proceed with the purchase. Resolving these legal complexities may require further legal action or negotiations with the parties involved in the original lawsuit.
If the court compromise is not challenged then yes as per the compromise decree any buyer can buy the share distributed as per compromise decree
I want to hear from devils advocate perspective. In 1980, A, B, C, and D purchased two acres of land together. In 1999, D filed a lawsuit against A, B, and C. In 2001, the Bangalore magistrate court issued a compromise decree in which D mentioned he accepted 4 lakhs in cash instead of the 8 lakhs he had originally asked for and given written statement im giving up all my rights of my 1/4 of the share. The court also ordered the land to be registered within 15 days, but this did not happen. Instead, the land was divided into 60-70 plots and sold to various people, including Party E. The sale deeds mentioned the case number from the lawsuit. Party E has paid all property taxes since 2001. Now F purchased a land from E If I'm D, and I wanted to claim my 1/4 possession in the property, should I directly file a suit to cancel the sale deed of Party F, or should i first need to challenge compromise suit[compromise decree validity seems to be 12 years i think as per law]. when 60 other plots are already got constructed people living peacefully , Is there any chances for me to at-least get the stay order for other 10 plots. Can it be done within a year? Note: 20 years had already passed
Asked 2 years ago
You have stated that the shareholders dispute was solved by a compromise judgment.
The compromise settlement judgment was not challenged till this date by anyone then it is deemed that decree and judgment has been accepted by all concerned.
Its been over two decades after the judgment was passed.
Now the respective purchasers have taken possession and are in enjoyment of their property with the tax receipts on their names.
If you would like to purchase the property from one of the buyers, you may obtain a general legal opinion and after due diligence you may proceed with the purchase if recommended by your lawyer
You will face limitation issue for stay order if you had knowledge of the same
Claim of D is barred by limitation
2) no appeal has been filed against compromise decree
3) D ought to have filed an appeal against impugned compromise decree which admittedly has not been done
4) court would not grant any stay
- Since the said property was purchased jointly in the name of A,B,C ,D , it means that each of them having 1/4the share in the said joint property
- Further, as D has filed a lawsuit , but the order passed therein was not complied by the D , and even the other party of the property also has not taken any legal action against D
- Hence, each party of the joint property having his right to sell his said share being the joint owner , and entire property cannot be sold without taking others consent and approval
- Hence, D having his legal right over his 1/4 th share in the property , and can file a suit for Declaration & Injunction before the Court , for declaring the sale of his share as null and void and to get stay order from the court.
Registration of release deed was necessary. Important link document missing. Loan lene and resale mein problem.