• Property sold to third party

I have filed suit for specific performance against an individual who sold a  property to third parties after taking an advance of six crores from me. While part of the suit schedule  property was sold before filing of the suit the balance was sold after i filed the suit. After filing of the suit  the lower court rejected my interim application for status quo against the defendant  on the grounds that i have not made out a prima facie case. I was not aware of the sale when i filed my Interim application for stay. After coming to know of the sale   I filed  an application for imp leading the proposed defendants / subsequent buyers. 

After my Interim application was rejected  by the lower court, I filed an MFA before the High Court.The High Court set aside the order of the lower court and held that i have made out a prima facie case.The High Court also ordered status quo BUT THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT I HAD NOT MADE THE PROPOSED DEFENDANTS IN THE LOWER COURT PARTIES IN THE MFA. Now the proposed defendants say that the order of Status quo of the High Court  is not binding on them as they were not made parties though the High Court acknowledged them in their order. The last and relevant para of the High Court Order is produced as below:
" It appears suit is filed on 25.6.2013, after issuance of legal notice. However,on 21.6.2013, one portion of the property is sold and on 10.7.2013 another portion of the property is also sold. There is pendente lite transfer in respect of one of the property. In that view of the matter subject to the result of the suit, defendant is here by directed to maintain status quo and not to further alienate the property. Impugned order is set aside protecting the interest of the plaintiff. All contentions are left open to be urged at the time of trial. However, its left open  to the parties to go for settlement"

After passing  of the above Status quo  order by the High Court  the proposed defendants/ subsequent purchasers are continuing to develop the suit schedule property. What i fail to understand is how could the court pass a order of status quo on the defendant when it cannot be enforced since he had already alienated the property.   One option for me is to go back to the lower court and press for impleading the proposed defendants  and get a status quo order. But do i have any remedy before the High Court as i am not very comfortable with the lower court..
Asked 2 years ago in Civil Law from Bangalore, Karnataka
Dear Querist
when the whole property which is related to your suit has been sold before and after the suit and the present defendant has nothing with them then this order is useless for you. as per your information, the proposed defendants are rightly said that this order is not binding upon them, you may file a review petition before HC for correction/adding one word in the Court order "defendant and all interested parties are here by directed to maintain status quo and not to further alienate the property. Impugned order is set aside protecting the interest of the plaintiff. All contentions are left open to be urged at the time of trial". if the court think fit then the court may allow the review otherwise you have the option to go back to the lower court and press for impleading the proposed defendants  and get a status quo order, the lower court have power to passed an order and restrain all of them.
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3522 Answers
129 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
1) in the appeal filed by you only the defendant has been made party . the order passed by HC of maintenance of staus quo does not bind third parties to whom property has been already sold by defendant before passing of orders by HC 

2) hence you have to amend your plaint then move trial court of an injunction restraining those defendants from creating third party rights on the property . 

3) since the stake involved in your case is more than 6 cores better engage a senior lawyer in bangalore for  fighting your case .
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23119 Answers
1214 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
You can make third party also a party to the same along with the defendent and get injunction restraining from sale  hence ammend your plaintiff.you engage a good lawyer
Jeshma Mohandas KP
Advocate, Kozhikode
567 Answers
1 Consultations
3.5 on 5.0
1. Since the defendants who sold the property after you filed the suit for specific performance were not party to the proceedings (MFA) before the High Court they are indeed not bound by the High Court order. The MFA filed by you and answered in your favour by HC has been reduced to an exercise in futility. 

2. The only feasible remedy at this stage is to modify your plaint and seek stay against the defendants to restrain them from creating third party rights.

3. It further seems that your case has not been handled deftly in both the lower court and High Court. I would recommend change of lawyer.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18057 Answers
445 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Hello,
As had been advised on a previous occasion either you need to get the High Court Order modified to include the Proposed Defendands who are currently third parties and are hence taking advantage of the anomaly in the order.This can be done at the High Court as you feel uneasy at the lower court.

Alternately you will need to go back to the lower court to get the plaint amended and the prayer so that the third parties can be impleaded as defendants.
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1949 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1. You have made a blunder by not adding the names of the purchasers/proposed purchasers as defendants,

2. The said Order of the High Court stands mreaningless to you for your above fault,

3. Immediately ammend the petition serving the copy to the buyer,

4. Since it is a high value case, engage an able lawyer.


Adv K.K.Ganguly
High Court,Calcutta
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12043 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Civil Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13934 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23119 Answers
1214 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18057 Answers
445 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12043 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3522 Answers
129 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
869 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
427 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1905 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2729 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0