1. Since the buyer did not show up for registration and did not have a change of bank in favour of the seller and whose willingness and willingness to register did not indicate this and did not register the property within 120 days, the stand sales contract was automatically terminated. The rapid spread of Covid-19 is already having a profound impact on global economic activity. The creative industry, in particular, is being hit hard by this epidemic. Important and highly anticipated events like Glastonbury 50 and the release of the new James Bond film – No Time to Die – have already been cancelled or postponed and TELEVISION companies have been forced to abandon planned filming. If three years have not expired, you must send a legal notice to the buyer within 15 days in order to conclude the sale in accordance with the terms of the contract. If the buyer does not conclude the sale through the execution of the deed of sale, you should take legal action against the buyer due to some compliance with the contract. It is the court that decides on the merits. The return of the advance is the problem, because we are not able to repay without the conclusion of a new agreement. the applicant had put forward several grounds for the annulment of the deed of sale, namely that the deed of sale had been executed fraudulently and without consideration and that Sita Ram had not voluntarily executed the intention or the deed of sale in favour of the defendant. The complainant also claimed that the witnesses to the deed of sale were interested persons and the defendant`s mustaches. The applicant claimed that he was in physical possession of the goods in question and requested that the bill of sale exported to the defendant be annulled.
48K « The plaintiff`s experienced lawyer cited two decisions, (1) in M. Pillai v. K. Pillai reports in AIR 1960 Mad 1 (FB) and (2) in Niasha Ghose v. Kari Siddek Ali indicated in AIR 1963 Assam 4 to support his argument that legal action under section 31 of the said Act can only be in the case of a person, the party to the act whose instrument is sought is annulled and repealed. I have reviewed both decisions and I believe that neither decision supports the general argument put in place by counsel for the complainant. In those cases, it has been clearly established that, in accordance with article 31 of the Said Act, the remedy may be granted only in respect of an instrument which may affect the applicant`s title and not in respect of a document executed by an alien in that capacity. The two High Courts decided that the applicant`s title had not been affected in any way by the contested instrument. These cases are therefore of no assistance to the complainant. Section 31 of the Special Deductions Act refers to both an invalid instrument and a countervailable instrument and, in the light of the facts of the case at issue, the applicants had a clear right to insist that the sales instrument in question be cancelled to the extent of its 4/5 share and can be cancelled in so far as it is his share. Given that the deed of sale had been executed by one of the co-owners who purported to transfer the entire store to the plaintiffs, the applicants had a legitimate concern that it would seriously infringe their rights.
I therefore do not think that it is unlawful in the decree adopted by the Court of Appeal, which annuls the deed of sale and orders its annulment in proportion to the applicants` share. The old contract only ends if you give the previous buyer legal notice that the sales contract is terminated for non-performance because he has not performed his part of the transaction within the time limit. . . .