Dear Sirs --- I bought a land in 2006 from Mr. Suresh. Mr. Suresh bought this land from Mr. Sukumar in 2004. Mr. Sukumar registered the document to Mr. Suresh though the document is originally on his father Mr. Narayan as he is passed away. Mr. Narayan have one son (Mr. Suresh) and three daughters. Three daughters have put the witness signature on the sale deed while registering to Mr. Suresh. I have received the Notices in 2008 from Mr. Sukumar second wife claiming she has a share on the property as the property is ancestor in nature. Mr. Sukumar have two daughters from his first marriage and one son from second marriage. The lower court gave the judgement to divide the property into 4 equal shares (equal shares to Mr. Sukumar and 3 daughters). From sukmars share of 1/4th, 4 equal parts to 1 to sukamr and 2 to 2 of his daughters from first marriage and 4th part to son from his second marriage. In essence 1/16th share to second marriage son. Now my question is I have purchased this property on my hard earned money and was not aware of all these family disputes. Please advise how to ensure my property is not partitioned. Mr sukamar clearly agreed in the registered sale deed that he will responsibility for any losses. How to fight my case in Legal courts?? Does the sisters have share even now even though they have put the witness signatures on the sale deed.
First answer received in 30 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
1) the sale deed entered into between you and mr suresh must have contained a indemnity clause wherein seller agrees to indemnify you agent any claims if any
2) on basis of said clause you can seek to recover the money paid by you with interest
3) contact a local lawyer . It is necessary to peruse various documents cited by you , the court orders passed in case filed by Sukumar family members .
Hi,
In your case, the sellers and his predecessors in title are liable to pay any money to the son by second marriage. You will need not pay 1 Re from pocket to the son by second marriage. As far as the legal case is concerned you need to appear entrance in suit and state that you were not concerned about the predecessor but acquired title in good faith and you are in possession and ask the court to discharge you and your property. Also is Mr.Sukamar alive today???
your property cannot be partitioned because if a third person took interest in the property by paying consideration his interest cannot be claimed afterward. If any person has any interest he can claim it out of the sale amount. TPA section 53 protects your right. sukumar upadhyay Vs Teg Singh AIR 1996
Mr Rajgopalan sripathi : yes. Mr sukumar is alive. Mr shivendra pratap Singh : the lower court have the judgement that ..the moment in the suit was filed, sec 52 of TP act came into force. HENCE if the plaintiff succeds in proving his care he can get the benefit of sec 52 of TP act .". Now my quetions are what is the difference between sec 52 and sec 53 of TP act.
1) section 52 deals with transfer of property in pending suit . it says property which is subject matter of suit cannot be transferred without court permission so as to effect right of other party under any decree or order passed therein
2) Its effect is only to make the decree passed in the suit binding on the transferee if he happens to be third party person even if he is not a party to it. The transfer will remain valid subject, however to the result of the suit;
3) section 53 deals with fraudulent transfers Every transfer of immoveable property made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor shall be voidable at the option of any creditor so defeated or delayed.
Nothing in this sub-section shall impair the rights of a transferee in good faith and for consideration.
The ancestral nature of property has to be proved by one who alleges it. The onus to prove the character as ancestral is on the sisters of your seller. If Mr.Sukumar got the property through succession then it is not ancestral. Notwithstanding the signatures on the sale deed the sisters can cull out their share if they can prove the property is ancestral.
The only way you can ensure that the property is not partitioned us by contesting the suit in defence.
Super. You are totally out of this. Ask sukumar to file a petition in court that he will take full liability of partition claim ( by forgoing some other property or his share in lieu of your property if at all the court awards in favour of son)and ask the court to discharge you and property from the suit. The courts will oblige.
Transfer of property without consideration for committing fraud is voidable under sec 53 . This transfer is without consideration and also transferee had intention to commit fraud by giving promise to take care of her.
You have stated that you have received notice from the second wife of Sukumar in the year 2008, now it is almost 8 years passed, whether she has filed any suit in the meantime? What is the status of the property at present?
Sukumar's second wife cannot claim any right in the Sukumar's ancestral property.
If Sukumar has sold the property after obtaining witness signatures from his sisters, where is the question of a legal case arise?
What is the case about and how Sukumar and his daughters and son get a share in the property, whether Sukumar sold the share of property that belonged to his daughters and Son?
You seems to be confused about a legal notice received in the year 2008 in the present stage hence you may consult a local lawyer immediately and take his advise on all such further issues.
52. Transfer of property pending suit relating thereto.—During the 1[pendency] in any Court having authority 2[3[within the limits of India excluding the State of Jammu and Kashmir] or established beyond such limits] by 4[the Central Government] 5[* * *] of 6[any] suit or proceedings which is not collusive and in which any right to immoveable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein,
Section 53 in The Transfer of Property Act, 1882
1[53. Fraudulent transfer.—
(1) Every transfer of immoveable property made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor shall be voidable at the option of any creditor so defeated or delayed. Nothing in this sub-section shall impair the rights of a transferee in good faith and for consideration. Nothing in this sub-section shall affect any law for the time being in force relating to insolvency. A suit instituted by a creditor (which term includes a decree-holder whether he has or has not applied for execution of his decree) to avoid a transfer on the ground that it has been made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor shall be instituted on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all the creditors.
(2) Every transfer of immoveable property made without consideration with intent to defraud a subsequent transferee shall be voidable at the option of such transferee. For the purposes of this sub-section, no transfer made without consideration shall be deemed to have been made with intent to defraud by reason only that a subsequent transfer for consideration was made.]
Hope your issues are clear now?