A typical case in which the property owner dies after the purchase of a house, and the purchaser sues his heirs for the transfer of ownership

(In order to protect the privacy of the parties and avoid unnecessary disputes, the names of the parties in the following cases are pseudonyms, if there are any similarities, please contact us to revoke them.) )

(A mini program has been added here, please go to the Toutiao client to view)

The plaintiff alleged

Li Moufei filed a lawsuit with the court of first instance requesting that Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan cooperate with Li Moufei to transfer the No. 1 house located in Fengtai District, Beijing (hereinafter referred to as the house involved in the case) to Li Moufei's name.

Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan appealed: Revoke the first-instance judgment, change the judgment in accordance with law, or remand for a new trial.

Facts and reasons: Wang Moupeng died in 2005, and the house involved in the case was registered in the name of Wang Moupeng in 2006, and whether the ownership of the house belongs to Wang Moupeng remains to be ascertained. In 2003, Wang Moupeng applied for the purchase of the house involved in the case, and it was impossible to follow the 2005 policy, and the house payment could only be an advance payment. According to Article 11 of the Contract for the Sale and Purchase of Self-managed Public Residential Buildings, the house should be registered in the name of Wang Moupeng's legal heirs, and the legal heirs did not inherit any rights and interests of the house, and of course should not bear any obligations. The first-instance judgment ruled that the appellant cooperated with the registration of the transfer of ownership of the house, which directly infringed on the legal property rights of all the legal heirs of Sun Mouhan.

The defendant argued

Li Moufei argued: agreed with the first-instance judgment and did not agree with the other party's appeal request.

The court ascertained

Wang Moupeng and Sun Mouhan are husband and wife, Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mougang, and Wang Mouwu are the children of the two, Sun Mouhan died in 1989, Wang Moupeng died in 2005, and Wang Mougang died in 2017. Wang Mougang and Wu Mouliang are husband and wife and have a daughter, Wang Moulan.

In 2003, Wang Moupeng applied for the purchase of the house involved in the case, and the selling unit converted Wang Moupeng's 35 years of service and the woman's 18 years of service, and Wang Moupeng paid 33,548 yuan for the purchase price.

In 2005, Wang Moupeng (Party A) and Li Moufei (Party B) signed a house sale contract, stipulating: Party A entrusted his daughter Wang Mouqiu in writing to act as an agent for the sale of the house. Party A has a house to sell to Party B. Wang Moupeng has purchased the property right of the house with cash (with a payment invoice), and there is only Wang Moupeng on the household registration, and Wang Moupeng is the only owner of the house. Party A sold to Party B for RMB 250,000. 1. Both parties agree that the procedures for house property rights are clear and legal, because the house property rights certificate has not yet been issued to Party A, Party A Wang Moupeng entrusts his daughter Wang Mouqiu to handle the procedures for the sale, obtaining the certificate, and transferring the house property rights. After the title certificate is issued, the transfer should be completed within one month. 2. The handling fee for handling the transfer shall be borne by Party B.

Party A shall ensure the smooth flow of water, heating, gas and electricity in the house sold by Party A, and Party A shall be responsible for paying the arrears before the sale of the house. This agreement is in duplicate, and it will take effect after signing to get the real estate certificate, and in case of demolition, the demolition fee will be collected by Li Moufei. Breach of contract requirements: If one party breaches the contract, the breaching party shall pay 20,000 yuan of liquidated damages to the other party. In addition to the signatures of Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei in the house sale contract, Wang Mouqiu also signed at the entrusted person of Party A.

On March 14, 2005, Wang Moupeng and Wang Mouqiu issued receipts, which read: Today, they received 20,000 yuan from Li Moufei for buying a house.

In 2006, the property rights of the house involved in the case were registered in the name of Wang Moupeng. The house involved in the case is now inhabited by Li Moufei's family.

During the trial, Li Moufei said that he only knew Wang Moupeng by buying a house, and did not know about his family members, and when buying a house, Wang Moupeng showed the purchase invoice, house lease certificate, Sun Mouhan's death certificate and the widow and unmarried certificate issued by the street, so Li Moufei had enough reasons to confirm that Wang Moupeng was the owner of the house. When the contract was signed, Wang Mouqiu was present and signed to confirm that Li Moufei paid all the house price according to the market value, Wang Moupeng delivered the house, Li Moufei and his family have lived in the house involved in the case so far, and the house sale contract is legal and valid.

Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan said that when Li Moufei bought the house, he knew that Wang Moupeng's spouse had died, and he should have known that the house was jointly owned by Wang Moupeng and his children. At that time, the situation of an only child was very rare, and Wang Mouqiu, as an agent rather than a counterparty, signed the house sale contract, so it can be inferred that Li Moufei did not act in good faith when signing the contract, at least did not fulfill his duty of prudence. In addition, the price of the house paid by Li Moufei was lower than the market value at that time, so Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei signed a house sale contract, which constituted malicious collusion and damaged the legitimate rights and interests of Sun Mouhan's heirs, and should be invalid.

The court held that the house sale contract signed by Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei was an expression of the true intention of the parties and did not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and regulations. Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan claimed that the house sale contract was invalid, and the court did not accept it. 1. Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan claimed that the housing sales contract was invalid on the basis that Wang Moupeng's sale of the house constituted no right to dispose of it, and there was no legal basis. 2. Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan claimed that Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei constituted malicious collusion, and the evidence was insufficient: First, when Li Moufei bought the house, Sun Mouhan had passed away for many years, and Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan had no evidence to prove that Li Moufei knew that the house involved in the case was shared by Wang Moupeng and Sun Mouhan and that he knew the situation of Wang Moupeng's family members. Secondly, Wang Mouqiu, as one of Wang Moupeng's children, was entrusted by Wang Moupeng to sign and confirm the house sale contract and the receipt of the house payment. In the end, Li Moufei had actually paid the purchase price, and Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan had no evidence to prove that the above purchase price was significantly lower than the market value.

To sum up, the house sale contract signed by Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei is legal and valid. After Wang Moupeng's death, Li Moufei's request for his legal heirs to cooperate with the registration procedures for the transfer of ownership of the house was based on the law, and the court supported it.

During the second trial, neither party submitted new evidence. This court affirms the facts found in the first instance.

Adjudication Results

Verdict: Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan cooperated with Li Moufei to transfer the No. 1 house located in Fengtai District, Beijing to Li Moufei's name within seven days of the effective date of the judgment.

Property Lawyer Reviews

Parties shall provide evidence to prove the facts on which their own litigation claims are based or on which they refute the other party's litigation claims. Where a party fails to provide evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove its factual assertion before a judgment is rendered, the party who bears the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences.

In this case, the house at issue was purchased in the name of Wang Moupeng in 2003 after the death of Sun Mouhan and the corresponding purchase price had been paid. In 2005, Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei signed a house sale contract, and then Wang Moupeng and Wang Mouqiu issued receipts, stating that they received 250,000 yuan from Li Moufei for the purchase of the house. Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan claimed that Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei constituted malicious collusion, but failed to provide sufficient evidence in this regard, and there was no evidence to prove that the above-mentioned purchase price was significantly lower than the market value.

Based on the trial of this case, the court determined that the house sale contract signed by Wang Moupeng and Li Moufei was legal and valid, and ordered Wang Moucong, Wang Mouli, Wang Mouqiu, Wang Mouwu, Wu Mouliang, and Wang Moulan to cooperate with the house transfer registration procedures, which was not improper.

Case handling experience

In the above-mentioned cases of disputes over housing sales contracts, there are the following key enlightenment points:

First of all, there is the clarity of property rights. In real estate transactions, it is important to clarify the ownership of the home. In this case, there was a dispute over the determination of the ownership of the house, which led to a series of subsequent disputes. This reminds us that both the buyer and the seller should conduct a detailed investigation and confirmation of the ownership status of the house before entering into the transaction to ensure the legitimacy and safety of the transaction.

Second, the decisive role of evidence in the resolution of disputes. When asserting the invalidity of the contract or the existence of malicious collusion, there must be sufficient evidence to support it. In this case, the appellant failed to provide sufficiently strong evidence to substantiate his claims, thereby bearing adverse consequences. This reminds us that in any legal dispute, the collection and preservation of evidence is the key to protecting our rights and interests.

Furthermore, the criteria for determining malicious collusion. When judging whether there is malicious collusion between the buyer and the seller of a house, it is necessary to consider a variety of factors. This includes the buyer's knowledge of the property status, whether the transaction price is reasonable, and whether the transaction process is in accordance with the norm. This reminds us that when conducting real estate transactions, we should follow the principles of fairness, impartiality and legality to avoid possible legal risks.

Finally, there is the intersection of inheritance and property transactions. This case involves a conflict between the share of inheritance that may exist after the death of the original owner of the house and the subsequent real estate transaction. This reminds us that when dealing with such complex situations, we should fully understand the relevant laws and regulations, respect the legitimate rights and interests of all parties, and avoid unnecessary disputes caused by ignoring inheritance issues.

In short, this case reminds us of the importance of clear property rights, evidence retention, legal compliance, and proper handling of inheritance-related issues in real estate transactions, so as to ensure the smooth progress of the transaction and the legitimate rights and interests of all parties.

Each case has particularity, the lawyer needs to conduct a detailed analysis of the case, in order to have a professional judgment, our team is good at dealing with all kinds of housing disputes, if you encounter similar cases, we sincerely hope that you can call to explain the situation in detail, we will try our best to answer for you!