Joint Property Residential.
1 year ago
I have joint propert consisting of 3 floors , can one of my brother residing in 2nd could sell his property .
Similar I have 3 shops ..leasehold , can it be sold
A.Dear Client
For the first issue, you both need to enter into MOU memorandum of understanding with the clause to sell as a single property or at the same time whenever you are ready and the total amount received should be equally shared among both of you
For the second issue, selling a leasehold property is slightly more complicated than selling a freehold, but if you're well prepared there's no reason why the sales process should be hard. Making sure you're aware of the specific terms of your lease agreement and having key documents to hand would help
Thank You
For the first issue, you both need to enter into MOU memorandum of understanding with the clause to sell as a single property or at the same time whenever you are ready and the total amount received should be equally shared among both of you
For the second issue, selling a leasehold property is slightly more complicated than selling a freehold, but if you're well prepared there's no reason why the sales process should be hard. Making sure you're aware of the specific terms of your lease agreement and having key documents to hand would help
Thank You
Helpful
Helpful
Share
A.Dear Sir,
If any member of family ready to purchase second floor then he can sell to others on the following principal of law. You can sell three shops provided will give preference to your brothers if they like to purchase it at the prevailing market rate.
=================================================================
Right To Joint Possession And Right of Pre-emption
The right of 'pre-emption' is given to the owner of immovable property to acquire another immovable property that has been sold to some other person. It is the purchase by one person before all others. ... The objective behind this right is to maintain privacy and prevent strangers to come in neighbour or in a family.
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 BhauLaxman v. BudhaManku [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.
If any member of family ready to purchase second floor then he can sell to others on the following principal of law. You can sell three shops provided will give preference to your brothers if they like to purchase it at the prevailing market rate.
=================================================================
Right To Joint Possession And Right of Pre-emption
The right of 'pre-emption' is given to the owner of immovable property to acquire another immovable property that has been sold to some other person. It is the purchase by one person before all others. ... The objective behind this right is to maintain privacy and prevent strangers to come in neighbour or in a family.
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 BhauLaxman v. BudhaManku [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
Read Related Answers
Mental Abuse and Harassment by Mother in law
Dear Client,
Such kind of inhuman ill-treatment and emotional harassment by a mother-in-law towards her daughter-in-law deserves stringent action and strong protest by filing a complaint under Sec.12...
Marriage and police related problem
Dear Client,
The Police do not have any authority to interfere or relinquish the marriage of two consenting individuals who have attained majority. In case of false allegations and misuse of power by...
Staying at husband house after court ordered monthly maintenance
Dear Client,
In November 2020, the Supreme Court of India ruled that deserted wives and their children are entitled to alimony/maintenance from their husbands from the date they apply for it in court....
Husband and wife problem
Dear Client,
In case of marital issues, you can approach a family counselor to resolve the matter and seek appropriate assistance.
Hope it helps.
Thank you.
Sapinda relationship
Dear Client,
Under the Hindu Marriage act marrying within your pinda ie Sa- Pinda is prohibited under the sec 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the reason that the biological offspring would be genetic...
Read Blogs on Family
Family Lawyers
Find Lawyers by Location
