Partition suit - preliminary and final decree

Whether the subject property stated to have been purchased by you is in your sole name or joint names ?

If it (property in question) is in your sole name, it cannot be partitioned / shared. however, if it is in the joint names, who else is the titleholder ?

How and why the property has been included in the suit for partition ?

What is the ground / reason to declare the sale deed as null and void ?

Incomplete and vague facts have been posted, which cannot lead to form proper opinion and oblige.

Did you discuss with the lawyer engaged by you, if so, what is his / her opinion and why do you doubt his /her advise ?

When the court in a partition suit declares your sale deed “non-est”, it usually means the seller had no exclusive right to sell the entire property, the sale is not binding on the other co-owners and you do not get ownership of the specific property purchased.

It means that though you purchased before the suit, lis pendens does not apply but that alone does not save the sale if the seller only had an undivided share or no transferable interest.

You have a statutory right to appeal. You can challenge the decree against your interest and pray that the share of your vendor be allotted to the property sold to you, or alternatively that you be given equivalent allotment.

Courts often protect bona fide purchasers by directing adjustment of shares, especially when purchase was prior to suit.

Property owner is A who is no more, he is having two sons namely 1 & 2, legal heirs both have equal rights in the properties of A. Now I purchased one(10 cents land) of the many properties of A from person 1. Knowing about this transaction person 2 initiated SUIT and court decreed in favor of Person 2, rightfully.

I purchased the property during which property was not partitioned and person 1 was enjoying the properties as person 2 was living in another city, though i knew the problem existing between them over this partition, person 1 convinced me that there will not be any issue. Eventually everything went wrong.

As per my lawyer, Person 2 has rights so he is supposed to get his share which is correct.

My question is since i Know the problem exist between person 1 & 2 even before the suit and still i proceeded to buy the property from person 1, will this turn against me in claiming the remaining portion after partition and can i get back the lost amount which i paid.

The person whosold you the property is having rights in the property but selling the particular schedule of property in favor of the buyer is incorrect because inthe absence of legal partition his share in the property cannot be identified hence you may have to wait for the partition to happen so that the court will ask the seller to compensate you with the share of property allotted to him in lieu of the property already sold to you.

Sir, entire property(10 cents) was sold to me not a particular schedule of property.

Problem is before this transaction they jointly signed and sold another property where I was a witness in the sale deed .i.e. I have full knowledge that both 1 & 2 have equal share in the properties of A. We are of the opinion that this point will have negative impact if I try anything legally through court.

Now only option we are considering is recovering the money(through locally influentially people) from the person who sold me the property.

Still not decided anything from legal point of view.

Despite the fact that the vendor (selleri.e., No. 1 son) had a share in the property of A it remained unpartitioned. Accordingly, the vendor cannot be specific in the schedule of property sold, hence preliminary decree of the property has been passed.

Besides putting social pressure you have the option to recover the consideration amount with interest from vendor.

It is better to consult and engage a local prudent lawyer for professional advise and necessary proceeding.

You can take appropriate decision based on the situation prevailing at your end.

if the entire property was sold to you it means that the share of second person was also sold to you, if you want to keep the whole property you can talk to the second person and make a deal wherein the second person can get the monetrary value of his share of the property and that monetary vale can be paid by you and first person (who sold you the share of second person). 

thanks to all experts for your advises.

I am not interested in the property anymore at the same time I do not want to lose the money.

Beside back door option of approaching my seller for recovery of money.

1. Can i approach this legally through a suit stating that "I have been cheated by my seller and sale consideration must be refunded"

                                                      OR

    2. Claim my right in the property once partition is over and ask the court to allocate me the remaining                    portion and for balance portion pray to the court for refund of money from seller

In above cases will the court knock me out stating that I am not a innocent buyer so I cannot claim my rights for the consideration paid.

You had both the options, till the sale deed is valid and in vogue.

It is true and correct statement that, let the buyer beware". 

It would be better to consult a local prudent lawyer for proper analyses of facts / documents, professional advise and necessary proceeding.

you can approach thorugh both the means. Can file a civil recovery suit agaisnt the first party who sold it but you should not display the fact that we though you were aware of such [partition yet you bought the property then the court cannot help you in any means.

Any meaningful suggestion requires that the Judgment/Decree be perused. What is the Case No.? Which Court?

I feel you should try to recover your money. You can file a separate suit or you join the appeal. Even if you are not a party to the suit, you can still join the appeal, because you are an affected party. 

Did the seller admit to you in the suit that he sold the property to you? If yes, it may be in your favor. 

Yes he has admitted in his reply in the court,

Talks are going on with the seller now to get back the money(atleast 80-90% of the amount).

However I came to know from his close sources that he is aware of my weakness that I am not a innocent purchaser and in case I am taking this issue legally he is ready to use that point in the court.