Property buyers to buy the house was transferred to the seizure was rejected-mfcclub.net

Buyers to buy housing seized for transfer was rejected – Beijing (reporter intern reporter Wang Tianqi correspondent Xia Li) had seized real, even if the buyers have to pay part of 1629, still unable to request the transfer. Yesterday, the city court concluded such purchase dispute case, dismissed the buyers for transfer house claims. February 5, 2013, Xin MOU signed a contract with the Beijing stock of housing sales contract, the contract will be located in the west of Chaoyang District dawn dawn a second-hand housing sold to Xin, the transaction price of 8 million 330 thousand yuan. Because of the housing mortgage loan, the two sides agreed Liu should pay in advance loans to banks in February 30, 2013, and apply for the right to cancel the mortgage formalities within ten working days after the settlement has proved. Since then, in accordance with the agreement to pay part of the payment of the purchase, but Liu has not handled the registration of the mortgage registration procedures. In desperation, xinmou Liu Mousu to court, asked Liu to continue to perform the contract, apply for housing mortgage registration cancellation procedures, assist with transfer, and payment of liquidated damages. The court found that during the course of the trial, because Liu Mou does not pay its debts, the real estate has been a number of court waiting sealed. After the court hearing that xinmou when signing the purchase contract has knowingly involved the presence of housing mortgage, after the house involved has also been waiting for the court to seize. So far, still be involved in housing mortgages and the state, that is the law or in fact can not be fulfilled. The interpretation by the court several times, xinmou insisted to continue to perform, so it is based on the solution and continue to perform, the proposed transfer request the court were unable to support. But Liu’s behavior has constituted a fundamental breach of contract, the contract can not be based on the actual performance of the request of the other party liable for breach of contract. Ultimately, the court rejected the request for the transfer of claims.相关的主题文章: