Question

Study the following information  and answer the question that follows:

Principle: A 'fixture' is something attached to the land or a building in such a way that it is regarded as an irremovable part of the property you are considering buying. Some typical 'fixtures' in a home include the hot water service, range top, wall oven, fixed floor coverings, light fittings, and a built-in (under bench) dishwasher. Garden plants, including bushes and trees, are also 'fixtures'.

Rule A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to have been sold.

Rule B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.

Factual Situation Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in Beghmara (Meghalaya) and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells it to Gurpreet for ₹60 lakh. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and Khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.
Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khaleeda no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Gurpreet has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil (Tamil Nadu) for more than 150 years before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Beghmara house.

As a judge you would decide in favour of 

विकल्प

• Gurpreet because when the price was agreed upon, Khaleeda did not inform her about removing the carpet  

• Gurpreet because the carpet was integral to the floor  of the bedroom and therefore, attached to the building  that was sold

• Khleeda because a fully-furnished house does not  entail the buyer to everything in the house

• Khaleeda because by virtue of being a carpet, it was never permanently fixed to the floor of the building  

Answer 1

Option "Gurpreet because when the price was agreed upon, Khaleeda did not inform her about removing the carpet " is correct. The facts of the case state that the sale value includes the price of the fully furnished house and at the time of the deal the carpet was spread in the bedroom of the house and Khaleeda did not inform the buyer about her intention of removing the carpet hence it will be assumed as a part of sale and judgment will go in favour of Gurpreet.