Evidence of a red hot property market; two purchasers each claiming to have purchased the same Auckland property.
Eugene Fernandes claimed she is the rightful purchaser of a Mt Roskill property with Keemati and Manpreet Angurala agreeing to sell for $1.53 million cash in a contract signed on 12 March 2021. There was an existing contract in place; a conditional sale to a Mr Singh for $1.6 million.
Ms Fernandes was to tell the High Court that the Anguralas had made a $535,000 capital profit in little more than a year of ownership and that she in turn had plans to make at least a $300,000 profit redeveloping the site.
The High Court was told Mr Singh’s prior $1.6 million contract was negotiated through real estate agent Harcourts. He had three days to arrange finance. This finance condition expired on 12 March. On the evening of 12 March, an agent from Barfoot and Thompson told the Anguralas that the Singh contract was at an end; finance had not been arranged. She presented a $1.53 million cash offer from Ms Fernanades which they signed. Barfoots had no listing agreement, leaving their commission at risk. Barfoots had the Anguralas sign a listing agreement next day.
Several days later, Ms Fernandes registered a caveat against the Mt Roskill property to block any transfer to Mr Singh.
Justice Hinton approved transfer of title to Mr Singh. His prior contract still stood. While the finance condition was not satisfied until one day after the 12 March date specified in his $1.6 million contract, standard contract terms required written notice of cancellation before his contract was at an end. No written notice had been given at the time of the second sale to Ms Fernandes.
Terms of the court order require the Fernandes caveat to be reinstated after transfer of title to Mr Singh, complicating Mr Singh’s plans for the property. The Anguralas, Mr Singh, Ms Fernandes, Harcourts and Barfoot & Thompson all have an interest in how the double sale is resolved.
Angurala v. Fernandes – High Court (4.06.21)
21.095