I would like to seek valuable inputs from this forum related to below property case.
Anand owns a piece of land which was obtained some 30 years ago, through due process from a government society and had valid registration documents. Few years back Anand expired and he did not make any will regarding the property
Context of case
Few months back a fictitious person created some fake ID proof on Anand's name as if he is the original Anand. By showing the fake ID proof, this fake Anand sold the piece of land to a party and the sale deed was registered at local sub registrar's office.
It seems even the party who purchased the land is also not a genuine buyer but could be part of some land grabbers group prevailing in the locality.
Recently Anand's family members identified the fraudulent transaction and filed a civil case in a local court and also sought interim orders to stop any further registration / resale and any construction.
Plaintiff came to know that the notices could not be served to any of the buyers or witness.
In a recent hearing, while the court has not given any interim orders but deferred the case to a later date citing another judgment from high court, that a district court should not give interim orders immediately but should wait for 3 hearings and should put the advertisement in two or three news papers
I have following questions
(1) Is there any similar case fought in indian courts, if so can some one please provide any details like cases numbers, references etc
(2) As no interim orders were granted what happens if any further fake or genuine registrations happens on the disputed land, would they get cancelled automatically or would these create further litigation and these also should go through legal battle, please clarify
(3) As till now the defendants are not traceable, is there any possibility that court can give a ex parte judgment (may be after some more proceedings if there is no representation from the defendants)
(4) Is it mandatory to file a criminal case also along with civil case. Please advise
(5) Does any one has details about the judgment which prevents a district court to issue immediate interim orders as requested by plaintiff.
Hope to have some expert opinion and guidance