In a recent court case, the Bombay High Court dealt with a complicated property argument involving the Shevale and Rane families. The case was about making sure a property sale agreement was carried out. Here's what happened.
The case involved the Shevale family, who were the ones being sued, and the Rane family, who were the ones suing. The argument was over a family property in Nashik. The Shevales had supposedly agreed to sell this property to the Ranes for Rs. 48,001 back in 1973.
At first, there was a spoken agreement in 1972 where Rs. 15,000 was paid, and it was said that the property was handed over. Later, a written agreement was signed on December 31, 1973, confirming the sale for Rs. 48,000. However, the Shevales denied any spoken agreement and claimed the written one was the only real deal.
"The defendants were willing to sell the property to the plaintiff for Rs. 48,001, although the valuation was only Rs. 20,000."
The Ranes claimed they paid Rs. 53,000 in total, which included paying off some loans for the Shevales. Despite this, the Shevales blocked the Ranes from taking over the property, leading to legal action.
The trial court and the first appellate court both sided with the Ranes, confirming the agreement and the payments made. The courts ordered the Shevales to complete the sale.
"The plaintiff proved payment of a total amount of Rs. 53,000 to the defendants."
The Shevales argued that the sale wasn't binding on all family members since only one member had signed the contract. The court agreed partially, saying the contract was only binding on the share of the member who signed it.
"The suit contract would not bind the respective shares of defendant nos.2 to 4, and the suit contract shall be binding only upon the share of defendant no.1."
The court changed the order, stating that the sale should only be completed for the share of the defendant who signed the agreement. The Ranes can ask for the property to be divided and take possession of that share.
