Explanation: For the purposes of this section, – 23. The consequences of executing the sale agreement are also very clear and result in the applicants not being able to sell the property to another person. In practical life, there are events when a person, even after executing an agreement to sell a real estate property in favor of one person, tries to sell the property to another. In our view, such an act would not be in accordance with the law, because once a sale agreement is executed for the benefit of a person, that person obtains a right to transfer the property in his favour by filing a legal action for a specified benefit and, therefore, we can say without hesitation that a right, with respect to the aforementioned property, belonging to the complainants, was enforceable and that a right was created in favour of the seller/transfer if the agreement had been executed. Unless there are some in this subsection, where – 17. In our view, the answer must be no. As noted above, the agreement for the sale of a property is part of the nature of a bilateral contract between the seller and the buyer. As part of this agreement, the seller agrees to transfer ownership of the property to the buyer if the buyer primarily fulfills his share of the obligations and is based on the payment of the sale benefit on agreed terms. However, such a sale agreement must culminate with a registered deed of sale to transfer ownership of the property in question from the seller to the buyer. There may be several reasons why such contingencies can never occur, and these reasons may be totally different from the seller who refuses to honour his share of the obligations arising from the contract or, for whatever reason, to make the transaction a legal controversy. Some of the possible reasons could be the seller`s inability to cede title under which the contract may be thwarted or revoked with mutual consent, or the buyer`s refusal or inability to pay the consideration.
In section 54F, the date of the transfer for the calculation of the prescribed time limit must be explanatory note 1. – For the purposes of paragraphs (v) and (vi) “real estate,” it should have the same meaning as in section (d) paragraph 269UA. “The deed of sale could not be executed because the complainants were prevented from dealing with the building by the decision-making court, which they could not have breached.” Lestat was executed as part of a sale agreement executed on 16.09.2011. In a major judgment of 01.07.2014, the Supreme Court of India ruled that a sale agreement would expire a certain right of the ceding on the property and would create a right in favour of the purchaser that would comply with the definition of “transfer” set out in Section 2.47 of the Income Tax Act for the granting of the u/s54 exemption in relation to the long-term profits of residential homes. The Supreme Court also noted that appropriate interpretation was required when considering an exemption application. (i) the sale, exchange or abandonment of the asset; or 11. The facts of this case are similar, if not on a stronger basis than in the case of Sanjeev Lal (supra). In the above case, an advance of only 15.00% of the deal was paid by Rs.1.32 crores at the conclusion of a sale agreement; Considering that in this case, at the time of the agreement reached on 1.4.1995, a 40.00 lira note had been granted on the total sale price of 41.00 lakhs for which the balance of the sale was executed on 5.12.2002.