INSTRUCTIONS TO BARRISTER

INTRODUCTION

The dispute relates to owner ship of the property address 68 Hyde Road, Hayes, Middlesex,
hereinafter called as “property”. Our client, Mr. Makhan Singh Sudera, hereinafter called as “C”
instructs that his brother, ___________, hereinafter called “B”, who is also the key player in this
dispute, managed to transfer the property into the name of his sister, Mrs. Bagga, hereinafter called
as “S”, by forging C’s signature, whilst C was serving prison sentence for Driving Offences during the
period 1988-1990. Mrs. Sudera, hereinafter called as “M”, is the biological mother of C, B & S - All
from the same father.

BACK GROUND

Originally, the property was bought in or about, 1985-86. The legal owners of the property then
were “C” and “M”. The said property was bought in the joint names of the C and M (Perhaps as Joint
Tenants – requested historical record of the property from Land Registry which is due to arrive). The
mortgage was in the name of M alone as C then lacked the capacity to obtain mortgage – C
therefore availed his mother’s earning capacity to obtain the mortgage. The Deposit for buying the
property was also paid by C through his sister S who is willing to testify. A Copy of cheque, for 10000
pounds which was paid towards the deposit, is enclosed.

I am further instructed, although the said property was bought in the joint names of M and C, M did
not have any interest in the property. She was holding the property on Trust for C (He pleads
Constructive Trust). M is fully aware of the arrangement.

Possession since the property is originally purchased in 1986

Since the date of purchase of the property C has been living in the property continuously ever since.
As regarding M she lived in her matrimonial home somewhere in Southall, Middlesex, all her life.

Payment of Mortgage Instalments – I was advised that C always rented couple of rooms in the house
to lodgers/tenants. The revenue generated from Tenants/Lodgers was collected, in cash, and was
deposited into M’s account to meet the mortgage instalments. This arrangement continued until
1988.

EVENTS AFTER 1988

Sometime between 1988-90, whilst C was serving prison sentence at various prisons in Wormwood
Scrubs/Sent/Brixton for consolidated driving offences, B did or caused third party to do the following
acts screamingly and systematically to the detriment of C:

 B forged C’s Signature on the transfer dated _________ (copy enclosed) and successfully
managed to transfer C’s share of the property to S.
 B successfully managed to convince S who innocently heeded to the dictates of B – S is
happy to testify this fact. (Perhaps, if the property was held in joint tenancy between M and
 C, B should have served Notice of Severance on M as well, which perhaps would have been
served on M without the consent of C).
 B then caused S to execute a Trust Deed dated ___________ (copy enclosed) in favour of D1
and D2 (then minors) who are the beneficiaries of B’s share of the property.
 B also caused M to execute a WILL (copy enclosed) whereby again D1 and D2 are made
beneficiaries of her share of the property.

CURRENT SCENARIO

D1 and D2 attained adulthood on _____________and ______________ respectively. Following

which S died on ________________. Following these 2 incidents D1 and D2 allegedly became
absolute owners of the property and therefore on ________________ the property devolved into
their joint names in line with the recitals of the said Trust Deed of S and Will of M.

Immediately following D1 and D2 becoming the legal owners of the property D1 and D2 issued an
invalid eviction notice dated _____________( copy enclosed) to C and his family members living in
the property.

Subsequently, having realised the notice dated __________ was not valid, D1 and D2 yet again
issued another section 21b notice under the Housing Act 1996 as Amended for vacating C and his
family. (copy enclosed). You will note that the last date for vacating the property is ___________ .

In the circumstances, we are instructed to take appropriate action.

MY OPINION

I am of the opinion that C should fight his case on two fronts seeking 1) Equitable Remedies and 2)
Personal Remedies.

EQUITQBLE REMEDIES CLAIM

C’s equitable remedies claim, in my opinion should plead under the following different principles of
Law.

Constructive Trust

The property was bought by the claimant alone. He used M’s credit to obtain mortgage therefore he
had no option than to have her name on the title. In fact she was holding the property on trust for C.

Proprietary Estoppel

M knows that C bought the property for himself. She was aware that she does not have any right to
convey her legal share as she was holding the property on trust for C. For the same reasons her WILL
should be challenged as well.

In the similar vein, S did not buy the property from C. This was a fraudulent transfer therefore S does
not have any right to create a trust for the beneficiaries D1 and D2.

Unjust Enrichment
D1 and D2 are currently the legal owners of the property. They have not paid the consideration for
the property nor did M or S from whom the property was devolved to them. The only person who
has been paying mortgage is C who also paid the deposit for the property. Therefore D1 or D2 will
be unjustly enriching themselves if C’s claim is dismissed and C will suffer irreparable loss and
damage which is un-equitable.

PROMISSORY ESTOPELL & PREVIOUS PROCEEDINGS:

It is very important to note that in or about 2004 when C came to know, for the first time, that his
share of the property was transferred into S’s name, C filed a claim against M, S and B for
declaration of title as main action of the claim and in the interim he was granted injunction against
eviction. This difficulty is Papers relating to this claim are not served on me. In fact C claims that he
does not have any papers relating to this claim.

These proceedings, I am instructed, were discontinued as M, S and B made promises to C that they
will transfer the property to C and requested C to discontinue the claim. C believed them in good
faith and discontinued the proceedings believing them and waited for them to transfer but to his
utter surprise he received the said eviction letter and section 21b notice dated _____________ and
_________________ when he was left with no option than to approach solicitors for appropriate
action.

Undue Influence and Presumed Undue Influence

B is the son of M. He is also elder brother of S. Therefore B was in a trusted position. It clearly
appears that he unduly influenced M and S in the following ways:

1. Causing M to execute the WILL – The main motive in M executing the Will was bequeath
M’s share of the property to D1 and D2.
2. Causing S to execute the Trust Deed – Again the main motive to execute this document is to
make sure D1 and D2 inherit S’s Share of the Property.

Not least to say is, the fact that S never paid and consideration for C’s share of the property to be
transferred to her. Further it is averred that C’s signature was forged by B or B caused 3 rd party to
forge C’s signature with an ulterior motive to transfer C’s share to S suggests presumed undue
influence by B on S to accept the property in her name with ulterior motive to convey her share
further to his sons D1 and D2 calls for an explanation.

PERSONAL REMEDIES CLAIM

Alternatively, C should be allowed to claim damages in the sense that he should be paid all the
money that he had paid till date since the date of purchase of the property in line with the schedule
of damages provided.

In further alternative, C is entitled to at least his share of the property as stood when the property
was originally bought (C originally owned half the share) which S by way of Trusted deed passed to
D1 and D2.

Similarly S or M cannot pass more interest in the property than they actually have. In this case
neither S nor M actually have any interest in the property. Even if there is any, which is denied, M
can only bequeath her share, which is also being challenged. S in any event does not have any share
in the property as she did not pay any consideration to C. So this is a transaction which calls for an
explanation because C signatures on the transfer were forged.

VENUE

As there are complex legal and factual issues, I imagine that the appropriate court to be filed will be
the Central London County Court, Chancery Division.

CONCLUSION

B should be added as a defendant to the C’s claim for the above stated reasons. Further, it appears
that B did not want to show himself in the grand scheme of events and remained behind the scenes
at all times. In that, he did the following actions:

 Allegedly forged caused the 3rd part to forge C’s signature and managed to transfer the
property to S instead of himself.
 He then caused S to execute Trust Deed by which D1 and D2 are named as beneficiaries of
her share of the property.
 On D1 and D2 becoming the legal owners of the property he then to issue Section 21 B
Notice under the Housing Act 1996 to evict C and his family from the property.

REQUIREMENT:

Currently I am india, I intend to send preaction letter by the end of this week, when I am planning to
return ( ticket is not booked yet) therefore could you kindly let me have your opinion by that date? It
would be highly appreciated if you could assistance if y

1. The barrister is requested to give his opinion

2. draft the pleadings to be filed as soon as possible.
3. Please advise if you need any more information is required from C?

Note: I am currently in India. On my return to UK I shall be taking instructions on:

1. How much is the rent is C collecting from Tenants per month?

2. How much is he paying towards the mortgage?
3. Since when did he stop paying mortgage? If this is the case?
4. What money is left over after paying the mortgage and what does he do with the money?
5. How are you currently paying the mortgage?