The right to property is an incentive for man to work hard. The rights should guarantee to meet the demands of natural justice by giving reward to man’s labor and should also promote economic growth.
The concept of lis pendens is explained under section 52 of transfer of property act 1882. Lis pendens literary meaning is a pending suit and doctrine of lis pendens has been defined as the jurisdiction, power or control, which a court acquires over the property, involved in a suit pending.
The doctrine of lis pendens is based on two theories: (i) Theory of notice and (ii)Theory of necessity
I. Theory of notice: according to some of the authorities the pendency notice should operate as notice to the whole world. The person dealing with the property is presumably to have notice of the pendency and must have acted in bad faith. Therefore he is bound by the judgment delivered.
II. Theory of necessity: It bases the doctrine as matter of public policy and preventing the parties to the dispute from disposing of the property in question and interfering with court’s decree.
The doctrine of lis pendens is based on equity, good conscience and justice. The essential ingredients of the section are:
• The pendency of any suit or proceeding
• The court must have jurisdiction over the person or the property
• The property must be specifically described and be necessarily affected by the termination of the suit or proceeding.
• The right to immovable property must be directly and specifically in question in any suit or proceeding.
• There transfer must be of immovable property and done without the authority of the court.
OBJECT AND SCOPE OF THE SECTION
The principle of lis pendens being a principle of public policy, no question of ...
... middle of paper ...
...he bona fide purchasers who do not possess any knowledge of the litigation and purchase the property. This makes them bound by the suit, which is inequitable. The ends of justice cannot be met by allowing the innocent to suffer. The reforms proposed will serve better purpose in meeting the needs of the all the parties and society.
The only problem that remains is the date of operation of the document, whether it is to be operative from the date of registration or the date of execution after the document is registered. The document should be operated for the date of execution of the document after the registration because the suit of pendency cannot be nullified on the grounds of non- registration at the time of execution. Therefore the amendment to the section 52 of the property law and section 18 of the Indian registration act is required at the current movement.
Compensation must be provided to the person whose property is being bought. Each country should work to set a standard for what is a fair market price, to prevent any people from inadequate compensation. The value of the property must be taken into account, and the effect this will have on their way of life. If a person is, for example, losing their home, the government must provide enough money to ensure that individual is able to relocate comfortably.
The hallmark of a property interest is that the party “[has] a legitimate claim of entitlement to it.” Merely having an adverse effect is not sufficient to make something a property interest. Normally, something does not qualify as a property interest if the state has discretion over the entitlement. Courts determine discretion by looking to whether a benefit can only be removed for good cause. Property interests go beyond traditional types of property, such as land or goods, but instead can include a wide range of government benefits. For example, the Supreme Court has recognized property interests in welfare benefits, government employment, social security benefits, and licenses. Courts use a two-tiered system for determining property interests. First, as previously mentioned, courts determine whether state law provides a property interest, and second they determine whether the nature of the interest is such that it deserves constitutional protection. In summation, a plaintiff has a valid property interest if they can show state law provides them a entitlement that is of a nature that is protected by the due process
Those who are to benefit from the covenant in today’s law can now be referred to by some generic description a description of class for example the 'owners of Hudson' however they must be in existence when the covenant is made and they must also be identifiable moreover the covenant must clearly be intended to be made with them as well. The cases of (White v Bijou Mansions) (1937)4 and (Amsprop Trading ...
...o the purchaser of unregistered land should the disposition be ultra vires, assuming that there is no actual notice of such then overreaching can take place. This has now evolved into their being no requirement for absence of notice. In addition Section 70 (1) (g) of the LRA 1925 protected as an overriding interest the property rights of those in actual occupation of the land as described by Lord Denning MR:
Property rights can be found in the oldest laws written, and equate the expectation of use or profit to some payment from the very beginning. Modern property rights can be said to begin with the transition from ownership by entities as being the primary form of property right, to the theory that property rights are to promote th... ... middle of paper ... ... operty’ in the case of Goldberg v. Kelly to be protected. This shows the state evolving in order to protect the citizen’s rights.
...aw in the US and Australia where the doctrine can be used to found a cause of action to remedy the non-performance of a promise unsupported by consideration. In the UK however, it is a means where contractual rights may be suspended, but not by which new rights can be formed. In the US, where the doctrine can be used as a cause of action and has been used in multiple cases, commentators have claimed that the doctrine is a ‘flexible means of achieving fairness’ and ‘cannot be reduced to a precise formula or series of tests’ .
Although, people should have a right to accumulate their own wealth and hold onto it, we can see that focusing on the process view can ultimately lead to an end result that is unjust for the society as a whole. Nozick maximizes individual liberties, but he excludes the restrictive liberties that Rawls’s second principle describes. Under Nozick’s theory, those who are least advantaged do not get a fair shot in society. Furthermore, Rawls proves that sacrificing certain individual liberties is morally justified if it creates an end-result that is just.
(i) only the periods the property was held by the person relinquishing the property (or any related person) shall be taken into account under subparagraph (B)(i), and
The Constitution of the United States, grants each citizen with personal property rights under the 4th Amendment. Our courts systems have upheld these rights time and time again when persons or organizations have tried to usurp these rights away from different groups and individuals. The same systems that have given, and upheld our individual rights seek to balance that with the rights of society and the rights of the group. Traditionaly court cases have followed a common sense approach, and have succeeded in balancing the rights of individuals with that of the group. Our court systems use strict scrutiny and procedures that maximize fairness among all groups and individuals. That is after all our societies goal, is to allow maximum personal
Private Property has been a focal point of the founding father since our countries inception. The right to private property has been a cornerstone of our constitutional freedom. This right limits the government’s interference to a private citizen’s property. This cornerstone serves as the foundation for the fifth amendment to our United States Constitution, which states, “No person shall be deprived of… property, without due process of law.” This amendment has been dubbed the “Taking Clause” that protects citizens from unreasonable government confiscation of private property.
Liberty is the right of the people to freely choose their way of life, behavior, or political views with limited restriction imposed by the law. While equality promises equal rights and opportunities for everyone regardless of race, gender, class or ability. Neutrality is based on the law remaining neutral in any conflicts thus allowing each individual to determine their own conception of good and evil. Liberalism recognizes that law is no more than a human construct, an artifact of human agency, socially and historically located, and therefore capable of renovation. This is a central concept in legal liberalism based on the idea that law is malleable which is a stark contrast to natural law theorist who believe in a single good or evil. Liberal theorist believe that people have the right to liberty, equality and neutrality which allows them to define their own self. However liberal theorist also recognize that humans are social beings and that we live in conditions of interdependence, thus one of the roles of law is to facilitate social interaction. Liberalism also recognizes that sometimes one person’s liberty infringes that of another so it is important to protect rights. Liberalism accepts some of the key arguments of Artifactualism. It recognizes that law is a human construct and it attempts to develop rules and principles.
...shness, succeed in establishing a social contract to defend their property rights.” So it is claimed that the social contract ‘we theoretically signed’ is created out of self interest from the wealthy people. The most disturbing part is in fact that the poor had to give up the only thing that belonged to them.
The purpose of enacting The Land Registration Act 2002, was to combat the uncertainties evolved around the previous Act, Land Registration Act 1925 . The need for reforms was highlighted in a report by Law Commission known as Land Registration for the 21st Century: a Conveyancing Revolution . LRA 2002 repealed LRA 1925, not only simplify the law by maintaining an accurate record of all the rights and alongside interests held by others that affect the land, but also to give certainty the basic concepts engrossed by the 1925 Act as it can be very clearly evident that 2002 Act revolves around the original and principle ideas with amendments.