My friend has made an unregistered agreement to sale on Rs. 100 stamp paper. He did not ready to purchase my land on the price mentioned in the agreement. After five years from the date of such agreement, I sold that property to another person. My friend is threatening to file a civil suit for cancellation of that sale deed and performance of unregistered sale agreement. Please guide.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
An agreement to sale is a contract in which both parties agree to transfer ownership of a property on a future date, subject to certain terms and conditions. However, either party can refuse to perform their obligations outlined in the agreement to sale, and hence it is not a final agreement between the parties.
In contrast, a sale deed is an executed contract in which the ownership of the property is transferred from the seller to the buyer, and it is legally binding. Once the sale deed is executed and registered, the transfer of property becomes effective and the buyer becomes the legal owner of the property.
It is crucial to understand the difference between an agreement to sale and a sale deed, as they have different legal implications. While an agreement to sale provides a framework for the transfer of ownership in the future, a sale deed completes the transfer of ownership at present.
Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act (TPA) defines the agreement to sale, stating that "A contract for the sale of immovable property is a contract that a sale of such property shall take place on the terms settled between the parties." The agreement to sale contains only the terms and conditions of the proposed sale, indicating that the parties agree to buy and sell the immovable property on such terms and conditions.
According to the provisions of Section 54, an agreement to sale does not confer any right to the parties, and it is not a valid document of ownership or title of the land. Since the buyer does not pay consideration to the seller, an agreement to sale does not create any right in favor of the buyer, and the buyer cannot claim any right in the property solely based on the agreement to sale.
Signing the agreement to sale does not mean that the property has transferred to the buyer, and its execution depends upon the fulfillment of other conditions such as payment of consideration.
If a party is trying to rescind themselves from the agreement, the other party can prohibit them from doing so. However, they can only bind the other party when they are ready or willing to act on the terms and conditions of the agreement.
Also read: Party to an unregistered agreement can be sued
This condition is mandatory because if they are not ready, they cannot compel the other party. The agreement to sale has limited use in this sense.
An agreement to sale is not subject to compulsory registration under the Registration Act, and hence registration of the agreement to sale is optional. In the case of a disputed property, your friend cannot file a civil suit solely based on an agreement to sale, as it does not confer any right to him. If the property has been sold by executing a valid sale deed, the buyer has obtained an absolute right in the property, and the law shall protect their right first.
If the agreement to sale was registered or unregistered, it has no legal validity after the sale of the land. If your friend had an opportunity to purchase the land and did not do so, their conduct proves that they were not willing to purchase the land. Hence, there is no ground for filing a civil suit based on the agreement to sale.
Question: I am a real estate broker and purchase lands from the owner on installments. So, I do prepare an agreement with the owner for sell his land in a fix period of time. For those period I promise him to pay the whole value of land in equal installments. The number of installments vary according to value of the land. I made a contract with a owner for selling of his land and payment of consideration in ten equal installments. Now, I have paid three installments but he is refusing to sign the sale deed. Thereafter, I have stopped the remaining installment but he did not agree to sign the sale deed. Now, I want to cancel the agreement. That agreement is unregistered.
Asked from: West Bengal
This agreement is not legally binding because it does not constitute a valid agreement. You expressed an interest in purchasing the land in equal installments, but subsequently found a buyer who would purchase the land in parts and pay for it with the sale proceeds. Therefore, you are not considered the true buyer, as the actual buyer is the one who agrees to pay for the land.
This agreement is also not an agreement to sale, as it does not involve the purchase of the entire property by a single buyer. Rather, it appears that you engaged the owner through an illegal agreement, which prevented the owner from selling the land as per their own wishes. As a result, this agreement cannot be enforced, as it lacks a valid consideration. An agreement is considered void if it lacks a valid consideration.
However, since you have paid three installments, you may be entitled to recover that money from the owner. If you have evidence of the payments you have made, you could file a civil suit to recover the money. The owner accepted the installments, so they are obligated to refund the entire amount.
In the case of Suraj Lamps and Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana & Anr. (2012) 1 SCC 656, the Supreme Court held that only a valid sale deed can transfer ownership from seller to buyer. Transfers made through a power of attorney or sale agreement are not considered valid. As a result, you cannot file a civil suit to cancel the agreement.
Question: My uncle has received one lakh rupees from his friend as an advance for sale of agriculture land. His friend took a notary on ten rupees stamp paper. In that notary his friend did not mention the amount as an earnest money. He said in the notary that my uncle wants some money for medical treatment and he will sell the land upon failure to repayment in three months. Now he does not receiving the money and pressurizing him to sell his agricultural land. If my uncle refuses to sell his land then could he take any legal action?
Asked from: Tamil Nadu
The agreement in question is ambiguous and does not reflect the true nature of the transaction. Your uncle's friend has attempted to purchase the land through deceitful means by disguising earnest money as a loan in the agreement. Consequently, he can only recover the amount on the basis of the notarized agreement.
Regarding the specific performance of the agreement to sale, the terms are ambiguous and against the true intentions of the parties involved. Since your uncle's friend is not accepting the money, he cannot file a civil suit for specific performance of the contract. He has suffered no loss and has no grievance against your uncle, so he cannot seek any relief from him. In fact, he is the guilty party as he is not accepting the one lakh rupees.
In this situation, your uncle should file a civil suit for the rectification of the agreement. He is willing to return the loan amount and can file the suit under Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act for rectification. He should not admit the amount as earnest money since his friend has admitted it as a sundry loan in the notary.
If a party fails to fulfill their duty in a valid agreement, the other party can invoke the provisions of the Specific Relief Act. Your uncle's friend has defaulted by not accepting the one lakh rupees, making your uncle the real aggrieved party to the contract. Therefore, he can file a suit under Section 26. It is advisable to file the civil suit as soon as possible.
Question: I have five acre land in Haryana. The market value of that land is more than six crore. Last year, I contracted to sell this land to a person living in Australia. However, he is living in Australia but his parents are living in my village. We are old friends and have faith on each other. He remitted three crore rupees in my bank account and prepared a notary agreement. After three years he is claiming ownership on that land. He filed a civil suit for permanent injunction and declaration of right. Please help.
Asked from: Haryana
According to the Supreme Court ruling in T.G. Ashok Kumar v. Govindammal, (2010) 14 SCC 370, a buyer cannot claim legal right in a property unless the sale deed is properly registered and attested by witnesses. As there is no sale deed executed in this case, no right in the property has been vested in your friend.
This agreement does not meet the requirements of a valid sale deed as you did not pay the full consideration and proper stamp duty. The notary affidavit is not sufficient. This is merely an agreement of sale, commonly used by shady property owners or brokers to evade stamp duty and cause financial loss to the government.
Under the law, an unregistered sale agreement is considered void. You should not be intimidated by your friend's threats of a civil suit. In your written statement, you can assert the following points:
- You are in possession of the land.
- The plaintiff did not pay the full consideration.
- There is no sale deed in force.
- The plaintiff is attempting to portray the agreement of sale as a sale deed.
- The plaintiff has no evidence to prove ownership of the land.
If your friend tries to produce the notarized agreement as evidence of ownership, the court will reject it. He has no right to invoke legal process for the enforcement of an unregistered sale agreement. Based on these grounds, you have a strong chance of winning the case.
Question: A person contacted me through the Magicbrics and shown interest in purchasing of my house. We had finalised the deal and prepared an unregistered agreement to sale. He did not deposit money as per the agreement and also do not come forward to purchase the land. The agreement to sale is still exist. Sir, please help how to solve this issue?
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
The person who agreed to purchase your house does not seem interested in buying it anymore, and has not taken any steps towards executing a sale deed. In light of this, it would be wise to cancel the agreement.
Since the other party has not paid any earnest money, there are no legal obligations under this agreement. This unregistered agreement is now stale and of no legal consequence. Therefore, sending a legal notice for the cancellation of the agreement should suffice. According to Section 37 of the Indian Contract Act, parties to a contract are expected to perform their respective promises.
Unless such performance is excused or dispensed with under the provisions of this Act or any other law. In the event that a party refuses to perform or is unable to perform their promise, the promisee may put an end to the contract, as per Section 39 of the Indian Contract Act, unless they have signaled their acceptance of the contract's continuation through their conduct or words.
As such, it is recommended that you send a legal notice informing the other party of your decision to cancel the agreement to sell. This will allow you to sell your house to any other interested party without encountering any legal problems.
Questio: I made an unregistered sale agreement with a buyer (who happened to be a real estate broker) and I want to cancel the unregistered sale agreement (within two weeks of its execution). However, that buyer refuses to get back his advance amount and forces me to register the property. What is my legal right and how can I return his money? ” The clause mentioned in agreement is if either of the parties fail to honour the agreement then the aggrieved party can take action as per law” so what is the legal right for me as a seller to unilaterally cancel the unregistered sale agreement.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
It is possible for you to cancel this sale agreement, and the buyer must return the money received under the agreement. This agreement does not grant any right or title in the property to the buyer, and he cannot force you to sell the land based on this sale agreement.
It's important to note the difference between an agreement and a contract - an agreement is not legally binding if one party has withdrawn their consent. As you have withdrawn your consent, this agreement is not enforceable by law. Although there is an indemnity clause, it does not change the fact that the agreement is not enforceable.
To cancel the agreement, you should send a legal notice to the buyer informing them of the cancellation and withdrawal of consent. This will make it clear that you are not willing to perform the agreement.
Hindu marriage is a sacred and holy union of husband and wife by virtue of which the wife is completely transplanted in the household of her husband and takes a new birth. It is a combination of bone to bones and flesh to flesh. The mutual consent divorce however, breaks this holy concept but provides a good remedy in complete breakdown of marriage. Section 13 B of The Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) provides divorce by mutual consent. It is a medium to dissolve the marriage through the consent of the parties. Divorce by mutual consent follows the consent theory whereas, Section 13 HMA follows the guilt theory of divorce.
Need not to prove the guilt of the party is the main difference between these theories. Therefore, the court can grant divorce without delinquency of spouses.
Subject to the provisions of the Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.
Section 13-B (l) Hindu Marriage Act
These are the essential elements of mutual consent divorce.
- Spouses have been living separately for a period of one year.
- They have not been able to live together.
- They have mutually agreed to live separately.
All above mentioned three grounds are mandatory for the divorce by mutual consent [Leela vs Mahadev 1991].
Read also: Can wife withdraw consent in mutual divorce case?
Spouses have been living separately for a period of one year
The term “living separately” has a very vast connotation. When the spouses are living in a single roof but not as a husband and wife, it deems they are living separately [Sureshta Devi vs Om Prakash 1992].
At the time of filing of the petition under Section 13-B the parties should be living in separation for more than one year. Otherwise the court will not entertain the petition. If the above conditions are fulfilled and the spouses have filed a divorce petition, they can convert the divore petition into a mutual consent divorce.
They have not been able to live together
It means that there is a complete breakdown of marriage. There is no hope to resume the marital relationship. The spouses have no desire to perform marital obligations and it would not be possible to reconcile themselves.
They have mutually agreed to live separately
At the time of filing of the divorce petition the spouses are mutually agreed that they will live separately. There is a free consent of both parties to end the nuptial knot. The consent is mandatory not only at the time of filing of the petition but must exist till the time of decree. However, any party can withdraw his/her consent before the passing of the decree.
Related: Spouses can convert divorce case into mutual consent divorce
My younger brother is prosecuted for the offence of robbery by Banglore police. The offence is committed by his friends and he was bounded by his friends to take participation in the commencement of offence. At the stage of the investigation, police offered him to convert in government witness. He accepted that offer and file application before the trial court. But unfortunately, his application has been rejected by the court. Is there any legal provision to file an appeal?
A co-accused cannot be tendered pardon under section 306 crpc if he was not involved in the crime as an active offender. The object behind tendering pardon to one of the co-accused is to obtain all the evidence regarding the commencement of offence if prosecution lacks sufficient evidence to the guilt of the accused. So the accused seeks pardon must prove before the court that he took part in the commission of the offence as an active member. He knows all the facts and circumstances of the case and he could be a worthy witness for the prosecution.
When an application for tendering pardon is filed by one of the accused without taking permission of the prosecution it shall not be entertained by the court.
In Lt. Commander vs State of Maharashtra AIR 1968 SC, it is held by the Supreme Court of India that if the application is filed by the accused for tendering pardon it should be forwarded by the court to the prosecuting agency for its comments/opinion. The court should not pass an order without the opinion of the prosecution. If the prosecution is agreed and also seek pardon of the co-accused then the court shall decide his application.
In A. Devendran vs State of Tamilnadu AIR 1998 SC, it is held by the court that accused must be worthy for the prosecution and prosecution should be in a condition that rest of the accused cannot be punished without the testimony of any one of the co-accused.
The decision of the court to dismiss your brother’s application for tendering of pardon under section 306 is correct. You cannot get any relief in appeal or revision because :
- The prosecution did not give its opinion regarding a pardon.
- He is not an active member in the commission of the offence.
- He also does not know all the facts of the offence.
- He is not a worthy witness for the prosecution.
- He just wants immunity from the punishment
My grandfather had purchased 18 acres of agricultural land and owned one house. He expired in 1969 leaving behind one son (my father) and one daughter. My father’s sister got married in 1943 and she had one daughter (born in 1944).
My grandmother expired in 1974. my father's sister expired in 2002. My father’s sisters daughter got married in 1971. My father has expired in 2014. now my father’s sisters daughter is asking for a share in my grandfather's property. Is she eligible & if so what would be her share?
According to the Hindu Succession Act, the only coparcener has right in ancestral property. Before the amendment in section 6 of the said act, only male linear member of the joint Hindu is included in coparcener. Therefore only male members of joint Hindu family can claim their right in ancestral property. After the amendment daughter is also included in the coparcenary system and she also accrued right in ancestral property. She has the same right as a son in the ancestral property. She can claim its partition.
After the judgment of Prakash vs Phulvati AIR 2015, the Supreme Court of India has held that only those daughter has right in the ancestral property whose father was alive at the time of amendment i.e. 20 December 2004, if father has died before that date she cannot claim share because she is not treated as a coparcener.
In your case, the daughter of your father’s sister [ hereinafter said Z ] cannot claim a share in the property. When your grandfather dies in the year 1974 all of his ancestral property was devolved in his son (your father) excluding his daughter because at that time daughter had no right in the ancestral property except maintenance and expense of her marriage.
When the ancestral property was devolved in your father it became subject to the ancestral property only for his legal heir and Z is no legal heir of your father so she cannot claim her share in ancestral property. If her mother had no right in ancestral property of her father then how can she accrue such right? Without satisfying this question her suit shall not be maintainable.
And she cannot satisfy the court because there is a legal maxim i.e. Nemo dat quod non habet means “no one gives what he doesn’t have” so when her mother had no such right how could she gave it to her daughter.
Sir, If anyone working in State Bank Of India at a clerical post applies for UPSC or State civil services are it necessary to take prior permission of competent authority for appearing said examination, if not taken and applies for two days of casual leave to appear the said examination.
Can his leave request be denied and will be asked to show the permission of competent authority by branch manager for appearing said examination at the time of sanctioning leave. If the employee went after the rejection of their leave and appear the examination.
Can his absence in-branch be taken as unauthorised? What are the guidelines regarding this and how to prove that this leave was right and it can’t be counted unauthorised?
No leave or extension of leave shall be deemed to have been granted unless an order to that effect is passed and communicated to the employee concerned. Branch Manager is the competent authority to grant casual leave to the officer subordinate. The employee has no right to get leave on demand. Whenever exigencies of service require to leave can be refused by the competent authority and it shall always be communicated to the employee in writing by the competent authority.
An employee shall be entitled to casual leave up to a maximum of 12 days in each financial year. the prior permission of the sanctioning authority shall be obtained before taking such leave. When this is not possible, the said authority shall be informed, as soon as practicable in writing or if it is not possible, orally or through any person, of the employee's absence from work, the reason thereof and of the probable duration of such absence.
In any event, a written application shall be submitted to such authority latest on the day the employee resumes duty. Casual leave is only intended to meet special or unforeseen circumstances for which provision cannot be made by exact rules. The employee must have a reasonable ground to being on leave because if he satisfies the competent authority about absence from duty his leave shall not be treated as unauthorised.
Any absence from duty without satisfying the requisite conditions under which leave may be taken or obtaining such leave on false grounds would justify the Bank after giving the employee an opportunity to explain in writing, to initiate the departmental proceeding.
Leave for appearing in the examination is a reasonable ground for taking leave. An employee can take extraordinary leave, for appearing in the examination, if his whole casual leave is exhausted.
The competent authority cannot decide a leave unauthorised unless he gives a fair opportunity to the employee for his clarification. You have to prove a valid reason behind it. Being on leave, without taking prior permission, for not more than 4 days is minor misconduct if no reasonable ground thereof. Penal action cannot be taken against you.
Absence without leave or overstaying sanctioned leave without sufficient grounds would be deemed as a “Minor Misconduct” in terms of Clause 7(a) of Bipartite Settlement dt.10.04.2002. So if you successfully explain the circumstances for which leave is taken it (your act ) shall not be treated as misconduct. You should submit your admit card and journey tickets (if available) with a view to proving your absence was reasonable.
The employee is not bound to give notice before going on leave in each and every condition, in some exceptional circumstances he can take leave without permission in writing and submit his request for leave at the date of resuming his duty. It does not matter that his previous request regarding casual leave is refused.
There are different kinds of leave and casual leave is provided to meet the exceptional requires of personal life. Appearing in the examination is an act to make life better and more valuable for both personal and social. So if the competent authority wants to prevent an employee from the betterment of his life without having any reasonable cause i.e. exigencies of service, his act cannot be said reasonable and fair. You would have a chance to explain the circumstances why the leave was taken without permission and If further action is taken by competent authority then you have a chance to represent it before the superior officer.
I am a school teacher in middle school. I took an insurance policy for my two children and my wife. Insurance policy is for medical treatment up to 2 lac in selective hospitals. According to the policy, it covers all the critical diseases mentioned in the policy.
Insurance agent explained the terms of policy and said that insured person can avail this policy after the expiration of one month from the date of commencement of the policy. My child is suffering from heart disease.
When claimed medical treatment of my child under the policy it was refused by the insurance company that I was not stated health condition of my child at the time of insurance. Please help.
Insurance policy is a contract. This contract of insurance is a contract of uberrima fides means contract of utmost good faith. You are bound to state all the facts, at the time of the making of the contract, about the health condition of your children and wife. You knew at the time of signing of policy that your one child is suffering from heart disorder. This is an important fact it is required by the law that such facts should be stated at the time of signing of policy. You committed a breach of a duty imposed upon him by uberrima fides.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. M. K. J. Corporation AIR 1996 SC; (1996) 6 SCC 428; held by the supreme court that It is a fundamental principle of insurance law that utmost good faith must be observed by the contracting parties.
You have committed a breach of this fundamental principle. Now you have no right to execute terms of insurance police i.e. claim medical expenses of your child under the policy. The court cannot construe terms of policy in favour of the insured person if there is a breach of fiduciary relation.
You should amend your policy on the new terms. Contact insurer and take novation of the policy. State medical condition of your child otherwise this policy will have no effect.
According to section 4 and 5-A of Maharashtra Restoration of land to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 a land purchased from tribal owner by a non-tribal between 1957 to 1974 is entitled to restore in the tribal person by the order of collector.
The collector is empowered under said act to acquire the land and restore in in the name of the previous owner if that owner is no more alive or reluctant to take it collector may transfer it to any other tribal person of the area. If no person comes forward or not interested to take it, the land shall be vested in the State Government.
The present landowner is entitled to get compensation about 48 times the land revenue fixed for the land. That compensation shall be paid by the government if the land is vested in the government.
You have no right to regain that land except compensation. your any litigation towards that purpose will not be maintainable. So forget that land because no rule is made in this regard i.e. to re-transfer to the person to whom it is acquired.
According to section Order 7 rule 11(a) Code of Civil Procedure, the court is empowered to reject the plaint if the cause of action does not disclose out of the plaint. At this stage, you may file an appeal against this order or file afresh suit on the same cause of action.
In Ratnavelu Pillai v. Varadaraja Pillai’, 1942-1 M.L.J. 569, decided by the court that An order rejecting a plaint does not conclusively determine the rights of the parties; nor is it a formal expression of an adjudication determining the rights of any party concerning any matter in controversy in the suit. Order 7, Rule 13, C. P. C. provides that the rejection of the plaint on any of the grounds mentioned in that order is no bar to a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
You are a necessary party to the suit. Your right is not adjudicated by the court. If plaint is dismissed then you may be evicted from the house. To file an appeal or a fresh suit on the same cause of action immediately.
