In a critical decision, the Bombay High Court as of late said that minor acquisition of proprietorship or title of a property does not qualify a buyer for coercively expel the occupant from the property. The HC said that the buyer must take after the due system of law for confiscating or ousting anybody, who possesses the property which s/he has purchased. The decision was conveyed by a solitary judge bench of Justice Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while hearing a supplication moved by one Kadir Bagwan looking for ownership of a private house, which he acquired in a sale led path in 2010. Be that as it may, until 2015, the woman, who was in control of the said house since most recent 20-years, was removed by Bagwan with the assistance of a Recovery Officer and also the police. Then again, the woman, who had bought the house at first and was not able to reimburse the advance, prompting the bartering, asserted that she was coercively ousted from her home and her marks on the ownership receipt were gotten without her assent. After hearing the parties, Justice Phansalkar-Joshi ruled, " A mere acquisition of ownership or title over the suit property does not entitle a purchaser to dispossess the person who is in possession of the suit property, without following the due procedure of law, like, filing of a suit based on the title.” “In this case, neither Bagwan nor the Recovery Officer has followed the procedure and all of a sudden went to the house of the woman and asked her to vacate the suit property, which is totally against the due process of law. Whether she has raised obstruction or otherwise, and whether she was really in a position to do so, in the presence of the police force, is not a relevant consideration, as it cannot be a mode at all to recover the possession of the purchased premises,” the request peruses. The court was astounded to take note of the way that Bagwan had obtained the property in August 2010 and after that, out of the blue in April 2015, he alongside the Recovery Officer had gone to the house with police to assume control over the ownership, without giving the woman, any earlier notice. . “In such a situation, relying merely on the possession receipt, which states that the woman handed over the possession voluntarily and without any protest cannot legitimize this process of delivery of possession,” Justice Phansalkar-Joshi said while reestablishing the ownership of the woman and rejecting the Bagwan's request.
Courtesy/By: Aparajita Singh
|
06 Jun 2018
