Ghaziabad Court Grants Permission for Sale of Minor's Property to Prevent Encroachment
In a significant ruling earlier this month, the Ghaziabad district court accepted an application filed by a mother seeking permission to sell her minor son's property share. The court's decision came as a preventive measure against potential encroachment, following the disposal of adjoining plots by other shareholders.
Property Details and Court Conditions
The minor's share in the disputed property amounted to precisely 1/30th of the total, equivalent to 0.028266 hectares or 282 square meters. Judge Vinod Singh Rawat issued specific conditions for the sale, emphasizing protection of the minor's financial interests.
The court mandated that:
- The applicant must enter into a new agreement with the buyer and file a pro forma sale deed with the court within six months from the judgment date
- No deed execution can occur without explicit court permission
- Copies of recent sale deeds from neighboring properties must be submitted to establish reasonable pricing
- All proceeds must be deposited in a nationalized bank as a fixed deposit in the minor's name until he reaches majority
The court noted that the permission would remain valid for exactly six months, after which it would automatically lapse if not exercised.
Background of the Case
Neeraj Devi, a resident of Mohanpur, filed the petition seeking permission to sell the plot inherited by her son Vansh following the death of his father Satyaveer Singh. The property involved multiple heirs with complex ownership structures.
The ownership distribution was detailed as follows:
- Abhishek Pandey and Amita jointly owned half the property
- The remaining half was shared among Krishnapal, Vinod, Mukesh, and Bovindra, each holding a 1/10th share
- Applicant Neeraj Devi and her two sons Harsh and Vansh each possessed a 1/30th share
Reasons for the Sale Request
Devi informed the court that she, along with Krishnapal, Vinod, Mukesh, Bovindra, and Harsh, had already sold their respective property shares to Shobhita Dayal through a deed dated July 24, 2025, with possession transferred accordingly.
"Vansh's share remains unsold, whereas all other shareholders disposed of their respective shares," she stated, adding that maintaining or cultivating the isolated 282 square meter plot had become impractical.
To protect her minor son's interests, Devi had entered into a contract with Dayal to sell Vansh's share for over Rs 7 lakh. She assured the court she had no personal need for the proceeds and was prepared to deposit the entire amount as a fixed deposit in a nationalized bank under the minor's name.
Court's Rationale and Family Consensus
After thorough hearings and examination of documents, including no-objection certificates from other family members, Judge Rawat observed several key points supporting the sale permission.
The court noted: "A list of the deceased's family members has been filed. It is not possible to preserve and cultivate the 282 sqm of property belonging to the minor, and there is a genuine possibility of encroachment. The purpose of selling the minor's share is solely to protect his financial interests."
Significantly, other family members expressed no objection to the sale, and the minor descendant himself stated he had no objection to disposing of his property share. This family consensus strengthened the court's decision to grant permission under strict protective conditions.
This ruling establishes important precedent for similar cases where minor children's property rights require protection through strategic sales when preservation becomes impractical due to fragmentation or encroachment risks.
