This site is under development, some of the functionalities may not work properly.
Anonymous
in Property Law
Asked May 15, 2017

Payment made for sale but registration refused by seller

  • 1 Answer
  • 273 Views

I have purchased a shop in a building in the year 2004 for Rs.3 Lacs.A registered agreement for sale was made in the same year.The possession of the shop has been given in 2009 and presently I am running my business from the shop for the past 8 years.Due to some financial problems I could not register the shop in my name.When I approached the landlord for the registration,he denied as he does not want to give the documents required for registration.As such,nearly a year ago I have sent him a legal notice.But he has not replied yet.I would like to mention that the amount was paid in installments.But out of Rs.3 Lacs,I have got receipts for only Rs.2.20 Lacs as the remaining amount was paid without receipt on the basis of good faith.It is mentioned in the agreement that only after the payment of the total amount I can take possession of the room.Kindly advice what to do.If I file a case against the landlord will he be able to demand the amount for which I do not have any receipt?Also I want to know whether he can evict me from the shop and resale it?If I am ready to pay the amount of Rs.80000 for which I don't have any receipt of payment can the landlord deny it and demand in the court to cancel the agreement?Is there any time limit for such agreement as I have heard that an agreement is valid for only three years?On what basis I can file the case in the court? Also I would like to state that I have been running my business from the said property since 1969 which is mentioned in the agreement for sale(the construction of the building started in the year 2004).Will this point help me in fighting my case?The landlord has also not provided the basic amenities like water,toilet,etc. which were mentioned in the agreement.

Answer 1

You need to file a suit of Suit For Specific Performance of Contract under sect 21. Specific performance is a remedy developed by principle of equity where a person is compelled to perform his part of contract.

According to Section 16 (c) of the Specific Relief Act, the plaintiff must plead and prove that he has performed or is willing perform his part of the contract contrary to the defendant.

In the case of Sukumar vs Susheel, 76 C.W.N 116, it was held by the court that Decree of specific performance is discretionary relief. It is advantageous for you that you have all the receipts and that the property was under your possession, as the assumption of the court would be that you are the rightful owner of the same. It is the duty of the defendant to disprove the same.

 

Agree Comment 0 Agrees almost 4 years ago

Please Login or Register to Submit Answer

Directory ads
Need to talk to a lawyer?

Book a phone consultation with a top-rated lawyer on Lawfarm.