Mumbai: In a relief for a flat purchaser who has had to wait for 13 years to take possession of a flat he had purchased, a civil court has ordered two residents of Goregaon to vacate a residential flat they had continued to occupy for over a decade after selling it.The sellers had doubled the price to Rs 1.38 crore despite the agreed amount of Rs 71 lakh already being paid by the buyer. The judgment marks the conclusion of a legal battle that began in 2016, ending with a clear declaration of ownership in favor of the purchaser and a stern rebuke of the sellers’ “unlawful” occupation. “…there is absolutely no evidence of oral agreement whereby the consideration amount was fixed at Rs 1.38 crore.“
Mangilal Jain approached the court after Gajendra Jain and Kiran Jain refused to hand over possession of the flat, despite having executed a registered agreement for sale in May 2013. The dispute centered on a 675 square foot property located at Rekha Villa in Jawahar Nagar. During the proceedings, the sellers attempted to justify their continued occupation by claiming that the actual purchase price was orally agreed to be Rs 1.38 crore, rather than the Rs 71 lakh recorded in the official documents. They alleged that the buyer still owed them 77 lakhs. However, the judge dismissed these claims due to total lack of evidence. The court noted that the buyer had effectively proved the payment of over 71.47 lakhs through documentary evidence, while the defendants failed to provide any proof of a revised oral agreement.The court heard how the buyer had not only paid a substantial sum directly to the sellers but had also cleared their outstanding mortgage with a private bank to facilitate the transaction. There is also no evidence to show that the plaintiff (flat purchaser) is in arrears of Rs 10 lakh towards the original consideration amount. The particulars of payment made by the plaintiff to defendant… (flat sellers) is produced... It shows that the plaintiff paid Rs 71 lakh to defendant nos 1 and 2.“I am of the view that the plaintiff is owner of the suit property and defendant nos 1 and 2 are in unlawful possession of it,” the judge said. The judge further observed that once the agreement for sale was executed and the consideration paid, the original owners “left no interest in the suit property,” rendering their refusal to leave a violation of the buyer’s rights.The court has now granted the defendants a two-month window to voluntarily hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the flat. Should they fail to comply, the buyer is authorized to secure the property through a court officer. Further, the judge ordered an inquiry into mesne profits—compensation for the period the buyer was deprived of his property—and directed the housing society to officially transfer the share certificate to the new owner.Concluding the judgment, the court ruled, “It is hereby declared that the defendant nos 1 and 2 are in unlawful possession of the suit property,” and ordered them to pay the legal costs incurred by the plaintiff.
