In a big city, a dispute arose between Amit and Rohit over an apartment. Amit claimed that he had purchased the apartment a year ago through a property dealer and had payment receipts to prove it. On the other hand, Rohit argued that the apartment belonged to his father and had never been sold. The conflict escalated, and eventually, the matter reached the court.The court asked both parties to present their documents. Amit submitted papers related to the apartment purchase, bank transaction receipts, and a contract provided by the property dealer. Meanwhile, Rohit presented the old property registry and municipal records, which still listed his father as the legal owner.During the investigation, the court discovered that the property dealer who facilitated the sale had committed fraud in multiple cases. He had forged documents and sold the apartment to Amit without the consent of the real owner, Rohit’s father.Upon further verification, the court found that the original registry was still under Rohit’s father’s name. The contract Amit relied on was deemed invalid because it lacked the genuine owner's approval or signature.The court ruled that the rightful owner of the apartment was Rohit, and Amit was required to vacate the property immediately. Additionally, the court ordered the police to take legal action against the fraudulent property dealer to prevent further scams.The verdict was a major setback for Amit, as he had invested all his hard-earned savings into the apartment. However, the court advised him to file a fraud case against the dealer to seek justice.This case became a topic of discussion throughout the city, teaching people the importance of thoroughly verifying legal documents before purchasing any property. As a result, people became more cautious and took preventive measures to avoid falling victim to such scams in the future. In a big city, a dispute arose between Amit and Rohit over an apartment. Amit claimed that he had purchased the apartment a year ago through a property dealer and had payment receipts to prove it. On the other hand, Rohit argued that the apartment belonged to his father and had never been sold. The conflict escalated, and eventually, the matter reached the court.The court asked both parties to present their documents. Amit submitted papers related to the apartment purchase, bank transaction receipts, and a contract provided by the property dealer. Meanwhile, Rohit presented the old property registry and municipal records, which still listed his father as the legal owner.During the investigation, the court discovered that the property dealer who facilitated the sale had committed fraud in multiple cases. He had forged documents and sold the apartment to Amit without the consent of the real owner, Rohit’s father.Upon further verification, the court found that the original registry was still under Rohit’s father’s name. The contract Amit relied on was deemed invalid because it lacked the genuine owner's approval or signature.The court ruled that the rightful owner of the apartment was Rohit, and Amit was required to vacate the property immediately. Additionally, the court ordered the police to take legal action against the fraudulent property dealer to prevent further scams.The verdict was a major setback for Amit, as he had invested all his hard-earned savings into the apartment. However, the court advised him to file a fraud case against the dealer to seek justice.This case became a topic of discussion throughout the city, teaching people the importance of thoroughly verifying legal documents before purchasing any property. As a result, people became more cautious and took preventive measures to avoid falling victim to such scams in the future. Submit