Mr. Tang filed a lawsuit against Mr. Ma for the first time, demanding the return of the original property, removal of interior decoration and various losses, and requesting Mr. Ma to bear the heating costs for the summer of 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Since 2005, Mr. Tang had been paying contributions for a collectively funded housing project at his workplace. On December 30, 2008, Mr. Tang received the keys to his new apartment No. 121. However, he never expected that his new home had already been renovated and was occupied by someone else. The occupant was Mr. Ma, who claimed that he had acquired the house through a friend. The door key was given to him by a staff member at the security post, who told him that apartment No. 121 belonged to him.
Upon further investigation with the collective funding unit, Mr. Tang discovered that Mr. Ding indeed had a collectively funded apartment in the unit, but his apartment number was 211, which confirmed that Mr. Ma had mistakenly occupied apartment No. 121.
According to Daily Gansu News - Western Business Daily, yesterday, the Intermediate People's Court of Linxia Prefecture informed us about a case involving the return of property. Due to Mr. Ma failing to verify that his apartment number was actually 211, he ended up renovating Mr. Tang's apartment No. 121, and eventually had to remove all renovations.
Was it a case of double selling? Mr. Tang investigated with his workplace and confirmed that he had purchased apartment No. 121. Mr. Ma, on the other hand, argued that he had bought the house from his friend Mr. Ma, who in turn had purchased it from Mr. Ding. In April 2008, after clearing the transfer fees and full payment, he went to the security post of the residential area to collect the keys to apartment No. 121. It was found that both Mr. Ding and Mr. Tang participated in the same collective housing project at their workplace. Mr. Ding transferred the house to Mr. Ma, who then transferred it to Mr. Ma. However, their agreements were rather simple, only including the size and total price of the house, without any information about its location.
In August this year, the court conducted the second trial. The court ruled that since the house was registered under Mr. Tang during the collective housing project, it proved that Mr. Tang had the right to use and own the property. Mr. Ma's renovation and occupation of the house without verifying the apartment number infringed upon Mr. Tang's legitimate rights. The Intermediate People's Court of Linxia Prefecture upheld the original verdict, ordering Mr. Ma to return the property to Mr. Tang, dismantle the interior decorations, and bear the related losses himself. Additionally, Mr. Ma must also pay over 8000 yuan for three years of heating costs.
Reported by Song Fangke