Behram entered into an agreement with Ahsan to purchase a real estate property. Ahsan was implied to be acting on behalf of the true owners of the property. Behram paid for the property, took its possession and the title of ownership was transferred to his name. The true owners approached the court seeking to regain ownership of the property as Ahsan was not acting on their behalf while carrying out the transaction. Trial court accepted the plea of the true owners and ordered for annulment of the transaction and ordered Ahsan to pay back the full amount of transaction along with interest for the period. Ahsan was also ordered to pay the cost of litigation to both the parties. Behram and Ahsan separately challenged the decisions against them. High Court upheld the original decision of the trial court.
On 21st Dec 1993, Behram entered into an agreement with Ahsan to purchase a two canal property with a house built on one canal of land. Ahsan claimed to represent the four women who were the true owners of the property. Rs. 400,000 was paid to the true owners as earnest money through Ahsan. Later, Behram paid for the purchase through various instruments which were acknowledged as consideration for the sale. Sometime later, one of the four true owners of the property expired and her share devolved to her legal heirs. Two weeks after her death, five of the six true owners of the property transferred the ownership of one canal of land via a gift deed in favour of Behram
To read more, download the file: