Who's the rightful owner of this house?

Normally I don't advice without a fee, but it appears only a clarification - so answers are as follows:-

1.New person

2.Yes

3.It's his wish.

4.Yes

5.It's upto him.

Dear Divya,

All of you heart of heart know that your Aunt is not the owner of the house in question. But you want to know the legal answer, which is as under:

1. Once a tenant always a tenant.  Unless your aunt could show as to how she got the house purchased by her from the original owner, she cannot claim it to be the real owner.

2. The new person who purchased from the landlord would have definitely obtained necessary Encumbrance Certificate [Fard] from the Sub-Registrar's office and satisfied himself about the ownership of the landlord.  That means, your aunt might not have got it registered in the Sub-Registrar's office.

3. Naturally, if it turns out that your aunt has forged the documents to get the house transferred in her name behind the back of the original landlord, she can be prosecuted for cheating and fraud.

4. The land lord has every right to sell his property.  After all he is not selling anybody else's property.  The demand by the tenant for huge sum of money is not at all justified.  Even if such demand is there, the land lord can jolly well sell his property.  

5. The buyer of the house has every legal right to possession of the house.

6. Your uncle's demand for any lump sum is not at all legal.  By remaining as a tenant he has not done any favour to the landlord.  Rather he should be grateful to the landlord to have let him continue as a tenant for so long.

[By the way please ask your uncle whether he would be willing to let his newly acquired house for rent, and then pay lump sum for getting the tenant vacated.]

I agree with above answers,however, the possession of purchaser cannot be said legal as though he became owner,but the possession of the premises was with the tenant,and real landlord had not got back possession of the house and so he could not have givcen physical possession of the property.

It seems to be a moot-court problem. Any have I give you some answers. Tenant cannot sell rental house. If he or his person sells with his connivance, defenitely it is criminal offence and the owner can take action. Asking an amount for vocate is illegal. If tenant denies the title of the building, it is enough for suit for eviction. Always any transfer without title is no legal effect. Purchaser from real owner will have better title.  possession of your uncle's  is legal. Any have your Aunt can use abuse of legal process for her malafide intention.

M.Valluvaraj

dears sirs

thanks for your responses.

yes i know my uncle and aunt are arrogant people.and i have full sympathy for the landlord and this new owner

dats y this question was put up..

also i wud like to add that when this house was taken on rent for the first time,it was taken on rent by my uncle's father,while my uncle was too young at that time.his father died in 1987.

i dont know how my aunt transferred this house in her name...all i know is she used some contacts and influences to get it done.

also i want to know if the landlord shud give a notice to the tenant to vacate the house or say so orally.because the new owner came recently in this empty house,where only the belongings of my uncle's family are lying..so a big tamasha took place when he came to occupy.

few more things:

i have heard, that if the tenant living in rented house for many yrs. has covered the original price of the house thru his rents in all these years,he automatically becomes its owner,in which law also supports him.is it true?

secondly i came to know that my uncle's landlord lost the papers of this house...so does his case become weak in the above scenario?

Does the landlord's case become strong here,since the tenant is not some needy person who has no place to live and has also shifted to his new home?

I am asking as I too know of a similar case.