Family Property dispute
3 years ago
My grandfather own a farm land with his brother's son, we are separated from my father's cousin but the land is not separated legally yet,
Our farms fertility is variable so we decided that who own the better fertile land will get the less land than the other so around 15 year my uncle harvested the bigger plot & we got the smaller.
Then 3 years back, we switched it mutually and the most important thing the path for the land is from North side only which is now in his possession,
Now he sold a part of that land to the third party without our consent,
Is there any way to stop him?
A.You should file a suit for preemption as follows and get it cancelled. Please give me Rank 5 if you feel my answer helped you.
===================================================
Right To Joint Possession And Right of Pre-emption
There are two views in this matter. The purchaser has no right to joint possession of the property compelling partition. He can sue all other coparceners for that purpose. [32]
If the vendee has obtained possession, the other coparceners can get him ejected by a suit. All that the purchaser is entitled to in such a suit is a declaration that he is entitled to the share of the coparcener against whom the decree has been passed.
The Bombay High Court has a different approach. It gives some discretion to the court in the matter of ejectment of a stranger purchaser. In Bhau Laxman v. Budha Manku [33] the court laid down three rules:
First, if a purchaser stranger of the undivided interest of a coparcener in a joint family property is out of possession, he should not be given joint possession with the other coparceners but should be left to his remedy of a suit for partition.
Secondly, on the other hand if the purchaser has obtained possession of the property, a coparcener who has been excluded may obtain joint possession with the purchaser.
Thirdly, the purchaser in possession need not be ejected in a suit for recovery of possession brought by an excluded coparcener. The matter should be decided on merits because he is not a trespasser. In a suitable case he may be declared to be entitled to hold (pending partition) as a tenant-in-common with other coparceners.
The issue came to be discussed by Supreme Court in M.V.S. Manikayala Rao v. M. Narasimhaswami [34] . The court held that it is well settled that a purchaser in such a case cannot claim to be put in joint possession with the other coparceners. He has only the right to ask for general partition of the joint property.
===================================================
Right To Joint Possession And Right of Pre-emption
There are two views in this matter. The purchaser has no right to joint possession of the property compelling partition. He can sue all other coparceners for that purpose. [32]
If the vendee has obtained possession, the other coparceners can get him ejected by a suit. All that the purchaser is entitled to in such a suit is a declaration that he is entitled to the share of the coparcener against whom the decree has been passed.
The Bombay High Court has a different approach. It gives some discretion to the court in the matter of ejectment of a stranger purchaser. In Bhau Laxman v. Budha Manku [33] the court laid down three rules:
First, if a purchaser stranger of the undivided interest of a coparcener in a joint family property is out of possession, he should not be given joint possession with the other coparceners but should be left to his remedy of a suit for partition.
Secondly, on the other hand if the purchaser has obtained possession of the property, a coparcener who has been excluded may obtain joint possession with the purchaser.
Thirdly, the purchaser in possession need not be ejected in a suit for recovery of possession brought by an excluded coparcener. The matter should be decided on merits because he is not a trespasser. In a suitable case he may be declared to be entitled to hold (pending partition) as a tenant-in-common with other coparceners.
The issue came to be discussed by Supreme Court in M.V.S. Manikayala Rao v. M. Narasimhaswami [34] . The court held that it is well settled that a purchaser in such a case cannot claim to be put in joint possession with the other coparceners. He has only the right to ask for general partition of the joint property.
Helpful
Helpful
Share
A.Without legally partition he cannot sell that land
if he want to sell it than without your no objection he cannot sell it.
So now you can file objection in it and prove it illegal registry.
Thanks
if he want to sell it than without your no objection he cannot sell it.
So now you can file objection in it and prove it illegal registry.
Thanks
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Ayantika Mondal @ Prime Legal
Responded 3 years ago
A.Hi,
Is the new buyer blocking the road? You can plan for easementary right claim
Is the new buyer blocking the road? You can plan for easementary right claim
Helpful
Helpful
Share
Read Related Answers
Property documents
Dear Sir,
It is not safe to give your originals to any broker. Thereafter, they may blackmail you.
Right over mother's ancestral property
Dear Sir,
You have no rights over ancestral property of your mother during her lifetime since it is her exclusive Streedhana. She may execute a Will or alienate the property as she may wish.
Transfer of property to wife after demise of husband
Dear Client,
According to the law of inheritance, on the death of a person, his legal heirs have a right to inherit the property. So, in this case, the mother and children being the legal heirs of th...
Path to reach home
Dear Client,
you can send a legal notice to the party for criminal trespass of the land and you can also file a police complaint criminal intimidation Or file a civil case against him and get an orde...
Property disputes
Dear Client,
Commercial activities in residential areas are impermissible under the law. In the given scenario, serving a legal notice to the owner of the residential house file a mass complaint to...
Read Blogs on Property
Property Lawyers
Find Lawyers by Location
