For filing execution of order limitation period is 12 years from date of order. Order still help A. sale in favour of C is illegal and void. Beneficiary of B who had received assets of B after his death is the legal heir so beneficiary of B should be made party after death of B. If required consult with detail.
Sale deed given by court - Lawyer missed to file execution petition
Lets call Party A(buyer), makes sale agreement with party B( seller). B takes 75% money and agreed for registration from 'A' B also takes money from Party C, because of greediness on selling on higher price. 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. Lawyer of party 'A' didnt inform about court order to party A, and didnt file execution petition. Meanwhile after 15days, B finishes the legal document registration with C( At this moment , A is not aware of court order , as well as this document registration in registrar office). now after 3 years, everyone gets to know this situation both parties A and C files a O.S cases. 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 . now, court order will still help party A to win the case? Party C, falsifies in the court that he was not aware of the agreement happened between 'A' and 'B'. what is the possibility of winning the case for party A against Party C?
Asked 8 days ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu
First answer received in 30 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
18 Answers
Sir, Case is running in the court for more than 20years.(So court order becomes invalid now?) Court order on 2005, party C files case on 2008 against party A and B. Party A files case against party B, sub registrar and collector on 2011 As said, upto now there is no beneficiary for party B. But technical legal heirs also includes Party A and thier siblings. If party A accepts himself as beneficiary of party B, what will be the consequences? Please your idea in tackling party C, who claims that he doesn't know party A and his agreement of sale. Party C holds the registered sale deed from. Party B , while party A only has the initial agreement and court order of 2005.
Asked 8 days ago
A being plaintiff cannot be beneficiary at the same time. A has to find beneficiary of B who had received assets of if B. A still can file execution on grounds.
Court order has become final and binding as no appeal has been filed by A
2) A should file suit to set aside regs sale deed
Court decree is final and sale executed in fab out of C should be set aside
-
2005 Court Order: Party A’s court order remains valid and can be enforced despite the delay. Party A should file an execution petition, explaining the delay due to their lawyer’s oversight.
-
Party C’s Deed: Party C’s registered deed may hold weight, but Party A can challenge it by arguing that Party C knew or should have known about Party A’s prior agreement with Party B.
-
Inheritance Option: Since Party B has no other heirs, Party A could inherit as a legal heir. However, this might weaken their claim as the buyer and should be considered a secondary strategy.
-
Legal Strategy: Party A should focus on enforcing the 2005 order and contesting Party C’s claim on the basis of constructive fraud, maintaining their position as the rightful buyer.
Dear Client,
The court order obtained by Party A in 2005, which granted a sale deed as a legal heir to use and sell, remains valid unless set aside. Even though Party B has passed away, the order still holds significance, as it legally recognized Party A's rights over the property. The fact that Party B did not appear in court and that the order was granted ex parte strengthens Party A's position.
Party C’s claim of ignorance regarding the agreement between A and B may not hold much weight if evidence exists to establish that Party C was aware of the prior agreement or if they acted in bad faith. The registered sale deed held by Party C could be challenged based on the principle of prior agreement and notice. Since Party B has no immediate family but has technical legal heirs, including Party A, this complicates matters. If Party A accepts himself as a beneficiary of Party B’s estate, it may strengthen his claim to the property but could also create potential conflicts with other legal heirs.
If Party A can provide evidence that supports their claim (e.g., the original sale agreement with B, the court order, and any communications that indicate C's knowledge of the transaction), this will strengthen their case. Further, using provisions under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), specifically Order IX Rule 13 about ex parte decrees, could help cancel actions taken by C if it can be proven that these actions were dishonest or done in bad faith.
Hope this answers your query.
- If B has not challenged that ex-parte decree then it become final and it can be executed by A at any stage
- Since, the Court has already passed an order in favor of A , then B has no right to sell the property without the consent of A .
- A can file a declaration suit before the Court for declaring that sale deed in favor of C invalid.
- Further, A can also file a compliant against B for the offence of cheating and breach of trust.
- Further, even after the demise of B , the said Order of the Court is executable.
Since A got a decree in his favor, he can very well proceed with the execution petition to w=execute the court judgment in his favor.
A should not bother about C and his defence because the sale agreement was entered well before the C purchased the property, hence A has strong case against C.
A should not bother about C and his defence because the sale agreement was entered well before the C purchased the property, hence A has strong case against C.
The court has already passed an order in favor of A, hence this precedent will come to the rescue of A to get case of C dismissed.
Any party in possession or disputing the same will only affect when any execution order is passed in the said decree until then nothing will change
What was the original suit for which got disposed ex parte?
What is the present suit for?
What is the relief sought for by C?
What is your prime objection in written statement?
Are you under possession?
G.Rajaganapathy,
Advocate,
High Court of Madras
Update: @ Siddharth sir @Mohammed sir : My lawyer denies the possibility for EP on grounds, says court will dismiss due to connected case running. As of now, no other assets are there for party B. Thank you Ajay sir , Kalaiselven sir, Prashant sir. @Shubham sir @Anik sir- Yes, we are countering saying party C's claims are false and it was a constructive organised fraud. @Raja sir. 2005 original suit- Party A approaches district court , cos Party B rejects to take the balance money and do the registration. Party B was scared to go to court . Hence court gives order in favour of A ([deleted]). Meanwhile B also took part-money from Party C. right after the court order, Party C finishes the sale registration. Currently case 1(O.S 2008) C put on A that A is creating problem unwantedly claiming C is possessing the property in a peaceful and rightful way. C claims he never knew about A, and the agreement of A and B, although A , B and C all live in the same street and they all knew each other very well. A and B are neighbours. C claims he knows B but not A. Case 2 (O.S 2011) by A: A is asking the court to cancel the sale deed of Party C and reissuance of order to gain position of the property. Party C is in possession of the property now not A. there is no strong prime objection from A, the old lawyer betrayed party A. A now has a senior advocate. The counter A gonna file now is that C is lying and we are trying to take HIGH COURT direction for this case with the help of old court order + death certificate of party B + Its the Ancestral property of party A + Requesting the court to take decision based on who paid money to B first. Any suggestions for the current approach and situation is highly appreciable PS: Party A is illiterate, played out by educated people for 20 years.
Asked 6 days ago
Your current strategy of involving a senior advocate and pursuing a strong counterclaim based on the existing evidence is a sound approach. Here are additional suggestions to consider for strengthening your case:
-
High Court Direction: Continuing with a High Court petition based on the 2005 order, the death certificate of Party B, and the proof of first payment is a strong step. It can help expedite proceedings and potentially offer relief if your current case is moving slowly.
-
Focus on Constructive Fraud: Emphasize that Party C’s claims of ignorance regarding the agreement between A and B are false, given that all parties lived nearby. This establishes constructive fraud, undermining C's position.
-
Emphasize the Timeline: Highlight the sequence of events where Party B, after a court order in A’s favor, transferred the property to C. This shows bad faith and strengthens the argument that Party C’s possession is not legitimate.
-
Execution Petition Strategy: If your current lawyer is hesitant about an execution petition, consider discussing other avenues with your senior advocate or seeking clarification from a legal expert to avoid missing opportunities for enforcement.
-
Ancestral Property Argument: If relevant, continue to emphasize that the property’s ancestral nature further strengthens Party A’s claim and legitimacy as an interested party.
-
Strengthening Evidence: Ensure all supporting documents are in order, such as the original court order, proof of payment, death certificate of Party B, and any documentation showing Party C’s awareness or residence proximity.
-
Court Submission Strategy: Filing a robust counter, using all available evidence and arguing Party C’s deceit and constructive fraud, is crucial. Highlight your payments, the 2005 court order, and the subsequent bad-faith actions by B and C.
Given the complexity and length of this legal matter, staying proactive, transparent, and focusing on the established legal facts with your senior advocate’s assistance is key to achieving a favorable outcome.
what is nature of case? There are grounds to file execution case if there is no stay on execution or unless earlier case order was modified. Trial court does not have power to dismiss execution case.
You have good case on merits
sale deed was executed in favour of C although court has passed orders in favour of A and full payment was made by A in favour of B
Party A may be illiterate but his lawyers are not.
However A has merits in his side and he can proceed with execution petition on the basis of the orders issued in his favour provided it is not barred by limitation as on date.
As A has engaged a senior advocate and the case is proceeding properly, you don't get confused by seeing varying opinions.
The plaint, written statement, interim applications, any other documents including orders has to be perused before advising whether it is worth carrying the matter to High Court.
G.Rajaganapathy
Advocate,
High Court of Madras.
Just proceed in execution on merits court will pass order and evict the unlawful occupant
- Legally , A cannot claim possession of the property from C after executing a sale deed in his favor.
- You can engage a new lawyer , if the present is not assisting in your case.