Jharkhand High Court Rejects Intervenor's Plea To Join Property Dispute, Reiterates Agreement To Sell Confers Only Preferential Right, Not Ownership Title
Live LawIn a recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court has reiterated that an agreement to sell does not confer any titles or ownership rights in a property, rather, it only confers preferential rights to the person in the favor of whom the agreement is executed. Justice Subhash Chand, presiding over the case, emphasized, “it is the settled law that agreement to sell does not confer any title, it confers only preferential right to the person in whose favour agreement to sell has been executed.” The above ruling came in a civil miscellaneous petition preferred on behalf of the petitioner against the order of the trail court whereby the court allowed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed on behalf of the intervenor. The Court observed, “Herein the only interest or right of the intervenor Pramod Kumar Soni in regard to the property suit were only of the preferential right in regard to the property in question to get the sale deed executed in his favour. 173 of 2017, intervenor Pramod Kumar Soni was neither the necessary party, nor the proper party.” The Court further said that the Trial Court by allowing this very application committed a legal error and, “it was incumbent upon the Trial Court to decide the suit itself in which the compromise had already arrived before the mediator in Mediation Centre of Ranchi.
History of this topic
Disputes Over Title Cannot Be Adjudicated In Suits U/S 6 Of Specific Relief Act: Jharkhand High Court
Live LawDiscover Related