Common use of DEVOLUTION OF TITLE Clause in Contracts

DEVOLUTION OF TITLE. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and Others claimed to be seised and possessed of and/or otherwise well and sufficiently entitled to as the absolute owner of ALL THAT piece and parcel of land containing by measurement an area of 2 Bighas, 8 Chittacks and 20 square feet, be the same a little more or less, together with all buildings and structures situated and standing thereon, all situate, lying at and being premises Nos. ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, P.S. and P.O. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 017, within ▇▇▇▇ No. 63 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, District Kolkata, hereinafter referred to as “the Subject Property”. B. Deed of Conveyance dated 21st March, 1947 made between ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and Others, therein collectively referred to as the Vendors of the One Part, and Md. Gulsaigal and Others, therein collectively referred to as the Purchasers of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta in Book No.I, Volume No. 38, Pages 64 to 69, Being Deed No. 1093 for the year 1947, the Vendors therein, at and for the consideration therein mentioned sold, transferred conveyed and assigned, unto and in favour of the Purchaser therein, ALL THAT the Subject Property, absolutely and forever. C. By a Deed of Conveyance dated 6th May, 1957 made between (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, therein collectively referred to as the Vendors of the One Part, and (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, therein collectively referred to as the Purchasers of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta, in Book No. I, Volume No. 56, Pages 117 to 123, being Deed No. 1558 for the year 1957, the Vendors therein, at and for the consideration therein mentioned, sold, transferred conveyed and assigned unto and in favour of the Purchaser therein, ALL THAT the Subject Property, absolutely and forever. D. In the premises, (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ became the joint and absolute owners of the Subject Property, each becoming owner of undivided 1/4th (one-fourth) part or share therein (hereinafter referred to as “Original Owners”). E. By an Agreement dated 13th October, 1982, made between the said Original Owners, therein referred to as the Owners of the One Part, and Pawan Properties, therein referred to as the Builder of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta, in Book No. I, Volume No. 94, Pages 113 to 126, being No. 1285 for the year 1983, the Owners therein appointed the Builder therein to develop the Subject Property by demolishing the existing building/structure thereon. F. Disputes and differences arose between the Original Owners and the said Pawan Properties, whereupon the said ▇▇▇▇▇ Properties filed a suit being C.S. No. 619 of 1985 before the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta against the Original Owners & Anr., inter alia, seeking specific performance in respect of the said Agreement dated 13th October, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the "Specific Performance Suit"). G. An Order dated 10th October, 1985 was passed in the Specific Performance Suit appointing ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ as a Special Officer to inspect the Subject Property and passing an interim order which restrained the Original Owners from dealing with and/or transferring the Subject Property to any person till the disposal of the Specific Performance Suit. (a) It appears that a report of the Receiver dated 22nd November, 1985 was filed in the Specific Performance Suit on possession of portions of the Subject Property. (b) The interim Order dated 10th October, 1985 was confirmed by an Order dated 20th July, 1989 passed in the Specific Performance Suit H. The said ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, a Hindu, governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, died intestate on 28th May, 1994, and his wife, Smt. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, also a Hindu, governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, died intestate on 6th January, 1995, leaving behind them surviving their sons, namely, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, alias, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, alias, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and their daughters, namely, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ alias ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ as their only legal heirs, who all inherited the right, title and interest of Late ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ in the Subject Property and their names were brought on record in the Specific Performance Suit. The above-mentioned heirs thus became entitled to the Subject Property in the manner as follows:

DEVOLUTION OF TITLE. A. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and Others claimed to be seised and possessed of and/or otherwise well and sufficiently entitled to as the absolute owner of ALL THAT piece and parcel of land containing by measurement an area of 2 Bighas, 8 Chittacks and 20 square feet, be the same a little more or less, together with all buildings and structures situated and standing thereon, all situate, lying at and being premises Nos. ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, P.S. and P.O. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata - 700 017, within ▇▇▇▇ No. 63 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation, District Kolkata, hereinafter referred to as “the Subject Property”. B. Deed of Conveyance dated 21st March, 1947 made between ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and Others, therein collectively referred to as the Vendors of the One Part, and Md. Gulsaigal and Others, therein collectively referred to as the Purchasers of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta in Book No.I, Volume No. 38, Pages 64 to 69, Being Deed No. 1093 for the year 1947, the Vendors therein, at and for the consideration therein mentioned sold, transferred conveyed and assigned, unto and in favour of the Purchaser therein, ALL THAT the Subject Property, absolutely and forever. C. By a Deed of Conveyance dated 6th May, 1957 made between (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, therein collectively referred to as the Vendors of the One Part, and (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, therein collectively referred to as the Purchasers of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta, in Book No. I, Volume No. 56, Pages 117 to 123, being Deed No. 1558 for the year 1957, the Vendors therein, at and for the consideration therein mentioned, sold, transferred conveyed and assigned unto and in favour of the Purchaser therein, ALL THAT the Subject Property, absolutely and forever. D. In the premises, (1) ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (2) ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, (3) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and (4) ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ became the joint and absolute owners of the Subject Property, each becoming owner of undivided 1/4th (one-fourth) part or share therein (hereinafter referred to as “Original Owners”). E. By an Agreement dated 13th October, 1982, made between the said Original Owners, therein referred to as the Owners of the One Part, and Pawan Properties, therein referred to as the Builder of the Other Part, and registered with the Registrar of Assurances, Calcutta, in Book No. I, Volume No. 94, Pages 113 to 126, being No. 1285 for the year 1983, the Owners therein appointed the Builder therein to develop the Subject Property by demolishing the existing building/structure thereon. F. Disputes and differences arose between the Original Owners and the said Pawan Properties, whereupon the said ▇▇▇▇▇ Properties filed a suit being C.S. No. 619 of 1985 before the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta against the Original Owners & Anr., inter alia, seeking specific performance in respect of the said Agreement dated 13th October, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the "Specific Performance Suit"). G. An Order dated 10th October, 1985 was passed in the Specific Performance Suit appointing ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ as a Special Officer to inspect the Subject Property and passing an interim order which restrained the Original Owners from dealing with and/or transferring the Subject Property to any person till the disposal of the Specific Performance Suit. (a) It appears that a report of the Receiver dated 22nd November, 1985 was filed in the Specific Performance Suit on possession of portions of the Subject Property. (b) The interim Order dated 10th October, 1985 was confirmed by an Order dated 20th July, 1989 passed in the Specific Performance Suit Suit H. The said ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, a Hindu, governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, died intestate on 28th May, 1994, and his wife, Smt. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇, also a Hindu, governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law, died intestate on 6th January, 1995, leaving behind them surviving their sons, namely, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, alias, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, alias, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and their daughters, namely, ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, and ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ alias ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ as their only legal heirs, who all inherited the right, title and interest of Late ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ in the Subject Property and their names were brought on record in the Specific Performance Suit. The above-mentioned heirs thus became entitled to the Subject Property in the manner as follows: