Pre-rented property sold days before sale deed

akash (Querist) 20 November 2013 This query is : Resolved
Hello Experts,

I recently bought a commercial shop in Delhi which was under a 9 year lease to a Pvt Ltd company, so that I could have a running income.

The lease deed between the previous owner and this company was a notarized one. 2 days after I bought the property after registering the sales deed, I got to know that the previous owner had terminated the lease with the company just 3 days before the sale date.

The fact that the property was under lease already is not mentioned anywhere in the sale deed. In my opinion, the previous owner connived with the company owner and entered into a temporary deed just so that he could get more value for this property by showing higher existing rentals.

Now the rentals that I'm being offered are much lesser. The only reason I paid more was because of the higher rentals this property was getting.

Is there any way I can prove that I've been defrauded, since I entered into the sale agreement solely because it was already under a lease with high rentals? I don't have any written proof of the promise made to me about the rentals I would be getting, so how do I prove this fact?

Follow Query

Report Abuse

BAALASUBRAMANNYAMM (Expert) 21 November 2013
Here you have to observe two things(1) If you want to made a sale deed, the physical possession of the premises should only be handed over to you on the date of registration of a sale deed.
(2) If any tenant is there, it should be mentioned in the sale deed that "a tenant is already existing and the present vendee is agreed to continue the present tenant on the same terms and condions".
In the absence of clause No.2 above in your sale deed, it seems that your seller has handed over to you a vacant & physical possession. Here you should not blame your seller.
(3) On the other hand, it is your duty to get and verify the information about the tenant.
So the whole mistake is on your part.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Expert) 21 November 2013
Your claim is absolutely baseless. Your imaginary concept does not have a legal answer. The vendor has not specifically mentioned about the tenancy existing in the property intended to be sold to you so your claims are illegal, fictitious. Mr. Baala has rightly and appropriately answered your query. Nothing more can be added on the subject.