Legal advise
A case wherein a vacant plot is jointly owned by 5 individuals. 4 belong to one family and 5th is an outsider. Plot purchased by borrowing from bank,all the 5 liable to pay back equally. The outside 5th owner refuses to pay anything to the bank and the total loan amt is paid by all the 4. Now the 5th owner is asking for his share. What is the legal remedy to settle with the outsider 5 th owner,pls advise. Thks. more
Viewed by 408
View all 36 comments Below 36 comments
Dear Mr. HARINDER SINGH, Pl. NOTE "After purchase,to build up and share in the ratio 58 : 42, 58% to the 4 together and 42% to the 5th." and NOT for the sharing the Plot. Hence the Subdivision is Barred - otherwise also. 2. "suit of declaration" is civil matter - realistically will take few of the years to follow with Appeals and Review/Revisions in various Courts of Law. . 3. Over and above "FINAL" verdict may not be acceptable to all. Hence the best way to safeguard the Interest of the Majority as the very intention of the 5 th participant is malafied. more
Jul 13
The banker will legal proceeding ,if the 5th party fails to pay, and portion of the 5th plot holder will be come under DRT more
Jul 12
There is no provision for default in the MOU. So it is the total dishonor by the 5th party. You must ask for his share, interest, penalty and compensation for the plot lying unutilized, loss of revenue thereon for all the four and compensation for mental tension. I feel by the principle of natural justice he has absolutely no claim as he has never paid anything. more
Jul 11
Thanks. Yes there is a MOU,amongst all,which provides for : 1.Purchase of plot jointly. 2.After purchase,to build up and share in the ratio 58 : 42, 58% to the 4 together and 42% to the 5th.Contribution towards building the plot also to be in the same ratio. 3.Now since the law of the local body,didnot allow any sub division of plot and also individual sale deed could not be executed,the MOU, couldnot be affected to.Hence the building was not started. 4.Taking the above as the basis, a suit of declaration was filed and the MOU,to be declared void abinitio,not to be given affect to. 5.Now before this suit could be decided,there was change of law,wherein the local body allowed individual floors to be built and individual title deeds registered.This changed the whole status. 6.In the interim,while the suit was on,the 5th owner never paid his contribution towards the loan amount borrowed from the bank.The total loan amount was repaid only by all the 4. 7. Since the conduct of the 5th owner was not positive initially,during and after the suit,the view taken by the 4,was to get out of this MOU,and settle the account of the 5th. 8. having approached the 5th,multiple number of times,he never agreed to accept his share as 1/5,but always was on the lookout for more,according to the share in the buid up portion,ie 42%. 9. Since the building was never built,it is unreasonable on his part to ask for more than his share as per the registered deed,ie of 1/5. 10.His conduct over the period,was never positive,hence to avoid any other issues,after or during building,the stand taken was not to build at all,in joint with him. based on the above facts please advise the way forward. thanks. more
Jul 11
Mr.Singh! I have sent my further opinion and you may revert back On 11 July 2016 at 11:24, HARINDER SINGH wrote: > more
Jul 11
