It therefore follows that the judgment in the previous proceeding states that the plaintiff knew that the rights in the plot were in a mosh. There is no determination in the judgment in the previous proceeding, according to which the plaintiff knew that Jereis had no rights left at all due to internal reckoning between the brothers themselves, contrary to what was registered at the Land Registry Office.
In conclusion, and for all the reasons I mentioned above, Munir cannot overcome the deal between Hajj and Jarais.
Rights competition between Hajj and the council
- According to the agreement between the council and the brothers, the latter undertook to transfer to the council's ownership and without compensation roads in the scope of 1778 square meters. Part of the same provision for roads is the statutory road in the scope of 1,162 square meters, which the brothers undertook to set aside equal parts of their rights (i.e., each brother 232.4 square meters). Another road is a private road that was defined in the Partition Plan M/8 as Plot 20/21 with an area of 616 square meters, and according to the Partition Plan M/8 it is associated with Jerrys and Brother Hani. In an agreement with the council, the brothers undertook that the rights in this way would be transferred from the rights of Grace in the scope of 128 square meters and the rights of the brother Hani in the scope of 488 square meters.
Haj claims in his summaries that the council has no deal since the agreement between the brothers and the council was not signed by the council. Haj further claimed that at the time of the alleged purchase of the land by the council, he did not know and should not have known about this agreement. Haj was not questioned in any proceeding on this point, and his testimony on the matter was not concealed. In addition, the testimony of the council's engineer did not help prove the veracity of the transaction and even harmed it. According to Hajj, the agreement that was presented was signed by some of the owners of the rights to the land only at that time. The Council was aware of the previous proceeding, but chose not to join it and to defend its alleged rights. In this proceeding as well, the Council chose to file its defense jointly with other defendants, who could be its opponents, to the extent that the plaintiff's arguments are accepted.