Yes in this case C will be suffering after a court final verdict in the suit. The ultimate possession will be given to the party who has court order and others will get compensated
Sale deed given by district court (ex parte) - EP missed-case reopened as seller sells to another party
Party A(buyer), makes sale agreement with party B( seller).Party B takes 75% money and agreed for registration from 'A'(2004). A delays balance payment. B also takes money from Party C, because of greediness on selling on higher price.(Feb 2005). A goes to district court, pays remaining money, 'B' didnt appear on court: Ex parte, court gives a sale deed to party 'A' as legal heir to use and sell(8Aug2005). Lawyer of party 'A' didnt inform about court order to party A, and didnt file execution petition. Within15days of order, B finishes the legal document registration with C(31Aug2005)( At this moment , A is not aware of court order , as well as this document registration in registrar office). C sells to a part of property to party D within one year of registration.Party D has position of the part of property now. Now after 3 years, everyone gets to know this situation both parties A and C files a Original Suit cases(2008). 2005 case reopens. Case is running, and Party B, the seller (THE REAL CULPRIT) died. 'B' has no family, parents etc. one of the Legal heirs would be Party A . Upto now there is no beneficiary for party B. Party C, falsifies in the court that he was not aware of the agreement happened between 'A' and 'B'. Party B when alive, in court said, C didnt pay money to B for the registration. Party C,D holds the registered sale deed from Party B , while party A only has the initial agreement and court order of 2005. Old lawyer tried lok adalat 3 times, pushing the case for 15 years without A's knowledge(A is illiterate). Party A resisted. in 2024 changed to new lawyer.We countered saying party C's claims are false and it was an organised fraud. Party B has twonames. Cases happening with name 1(aadhar card,ration card etc) and name2(voter id) used for registration. Signature in the registration is fake. Easily visible. IA by A for forensic rejected by court as its trying to delay the case. also not enough signatures samples(used signatures from wakkalath, cant find more). Case entered Arguments now My lawyer says we are in the weak side as C and D have the land and as B is dead. we can argue only saying the party B legal name doesnt match voter id. Now how to build a very strong argument points? which ones to highlight and never miss? should we overlook the below a) 2005 ex parte court order b) Party C cunningness to do registration within 2 weeks of court order c)C is not bonafide as he sold within one year a big part of the property. also if there is any similar ref cases to support my case, please comment.fingeres crossed
Asked 3 hours ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu
Ask a question and receive multiple answers in one hour.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
2 Answers
Dear Sir/Madam,
Your strongest point is the 2005 decree and the doctrine of lis pendens, not merely the difference in B’s names. If A’s suit was filed before the sale dated 31 August 2005 and the decree remains valid, the transfers to C and thereafter D remain subject to that decree, even if they claim lack of notice.
However, the major difficulty is limitation. A decree for specific performance normally requires execution, and Article 136 generally provides 12 years from the date it became enforceable. The complete decree, execution proceedings and reopening orders must therefore be examined carefully.
Highlight B’s admission that C paid no consideration, the timing of the sale, and C/D’s derivative title. Resale within one year alone does not prove fraud, while the alleged forged signature or name discrepancy must be proved through admissible evidence. Relevant judgments include Guruswamy Nadar v. P. Lakshmi Ammal, Thomson Press v. Nanak Builders, and Durga Prasad v. Deep Chand.
Obtain an urgent second opinion from a senior civil/property lawyer with the certified decree, entire order sheet, execution records and both subsequent sale deeds before final arguments conclude.
Advocate Saurabh Agrawal
