Ayman shape
After selling the house a quarter of a century before their father, Bahraini heirs tried to disguise them from transferring the property to the buyer despite the signing of two agencies to do so, but the judiciary ended after a dispute that continued in the courts of first degree, appeal and discrimination by ruling on the health and penetration of the contract of sale of the house.
The incident occurred in 2000, when the primary sale contract was signed by Bahraini for a woman, at a price of 80 thousand dinars, which was paid by the lady to the heir, in batches; 40 thousand, then 20 thousand and finally 20 thousand dinars, and the heirs applied one of them to sell the house to the lady, and the document of the house registered in the name of the heirs received, but the property was conditional for 17 years, and she was unable to register it in her name, to be surprised by the seizure of the house to pay a debt on one of the heirs, and a decision was issued by the Court of Implementation to proceed with the procedures for selling the property.
The buyer’s representative, lawyer Nabil Al -Qassab, filed a lawsuit in which he requested the transfer of the ownership of the house to the plaintiff, the validity and enforcement of the sales contract, while the heirs disavowed the sale contract and the agencies they signed, and the court issued the first degree of its ruling to invalidate the sale contract for violating the inhibitor of the disposal, so she stabbed the ruling and asked its agent to address the Ministry of Housing to inquire about the extent or disappearance of the impact The appellant and the judiciary again with the validity and enforcement of the sales contract, and said that the prohibition of disposal has passed its duration, and that the heirs have edited a power of attorney that authorized it to transfer the ownership of the property, indicating their vacation, the sale contract issued by their inheritance, but the Court of Appeal supported the ruling of the first degree.
The prosecutor of the Court of Cassation, which broke the ruling, and returned it to the court that issued it to judge it again, where the court indicated that the heirs had issued two agencies to sell the house to the appellant, which confirms that their vacation is proven as an owners of the property, despite its issuance of those who have no right to issue it, according to what is required by Article 436 of the civil legalization, and then that contract is considered to be in the face of their confrontation Its effects before them, as the pillars of his convening and the conditions of his health were available from the unjust not tainted with a defect of the will and a specific place specifically in order to be ignorant and the permissible dealing in it and a known cash price, and then he is generated by an obligation on the appellant to transfer the property ownership of the appellant, and the judiciary of the health and enforcement of the contract.
