How property lawyers use Justis AI

The problem

A buyer or a lender wants a title opinion covering thirty years, and the file arrives as sixty scanned documents in no particular order. Building the chain by hand means reading every deed for the schedule, the extent, the parties and the recital of how the vendor came to own the land, then checking that each recital matches the deed before it.

The defects hide in the joins. The extent shrinks by four guntas between two deeds with no explanation, a transfer rests on a general power of attorney rather than a registered conveyance, or the revenue record still shows an owner from two transfers back.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads every deed, mutation entry and extract in the project, runs OCR on the scans and tells you when it is reading one, and lays out the chain in order: each transfer with the parties, the date, the registration details, the extent and the document and page it comes from.

It checks each link against the next and flags what does not reconcile: a vendor who does not appear as the purchaser in the previous deed, a schedule or extent that changes, an unregistered instrument where section 17 of the Registration Act requires registration, and a mutation that was never made. The chain and the list of requisitions come back in Word.

The problem

The encumbrance certificate is the start of the search, not the end of it. It shows registered transactions, but an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds under section 58(f) of the Transfer of Property Act may never appear on it, and a partial release deed is easy to read as a full one.

Pending suits matter just as much. A sale made while a suit concerning the property is pending is subject to its result under the doctrine of lis pendens in section 52 of the Act, so a partition suit filed by a family member can bind the buyer who never heard of it.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the encumbrance certificates, the search reports you upload, the bank's sanction and release letters and any court papers, and lists every charge with its creation, its release and what remains. It marks the years the certificates do not cover and the charges shown in a sanction letter that the certificate does not show.

For litigation, it reads the plaints and orders on file, identifies the suits that concern this property, and states what each could do to the title if it succeeds. The result is a ranked list of encumbrances, each with the document behind it.

The problem

Stamp duty is a state question. The article that applies, the rate, the basis of valuation and the concessions differ between states, and a single transaction can involve an agreement for sale, a power of attorney, a sale deed and a rectification, each stamped under a different article.

Getting it wrong has consequences beyond the deficit. An instrument that is not duly stamped can be impounded and is not admissible in evidence until the duty and penalty are paid, and a document that needs registration but is not registered does not affect the property under section 49 of the Registration Act.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the draft instruments and the valuation papers you upload, identifies which instruments need registration and which article of the applicable state stamp schedule governs each, and sets out the duty working with the rate and the value it is charged on. It tells you where the state schedule you uploaded or cited is the source, so the working can be checked.

It also checks the drafts for the registration points that cause rejections at the sub-registrar's office: the schedule and boundaries, the extent in words and figures, the presentation period under section 23 and the documents to annex.

The problem

The developer's standard agreement for sale runs to forty pages, and the buyer's lawyer has a day to mark it up. The clauses that matter are predictable: the possession date and what happens if it slips, the carpet area and how it is measured, the payment plan, the defect liability period and the cancellation deductions.

For a registered RERA project the agreement must follow the form in the state rules, so a clause that departs from it in the promoter's favour is a point to push back on, not a matter of taste.

How Justis handles it

Write your negotiating positions down once as a playbook: possession, delay interest, carpet area, defect liability, cancellation, and the rest. Justis reads each agreement against it, flags every clause that departs from your position and from the rights the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 gives the allottee, and proposes the change.

The mark-up comes back as tracked changes in the Word document, with a short issues list explaining each change so the client or the developer's counsel can follow it.

The problem

A flat promised for March 2024 has still not been handed over, and the buyer wants either the money back with interest or possession with interest for the delay. Section 18 of RERA gives both routes, but the complaint has to be built from the agreement, the registration details, the payment receipts and two years of correspondence.

When the order comes, the losing side has sixty days to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 44, and a promoter who appeals must first deposit the amount directed under section 43(5).

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the agreement, the receipts, the demand letters and the correspondence, builds the payment schedule and the delay period with the page for each figure, and drafts the complaint under section 31 with the relief under section 18: refund with interest, or interest for every month of delay until possession, at the rate the state rules prescribe.

When an order arrives, it reads the order against the record, computes the last date to appeal, and drafts the grounds for whichever side you act for.

The problem

A client acquiring a building, or taking over a retail chain, inherits forty leases on forty different templates. Someone has to pull out the rent, the escalation, the lock-in, the term, the renewal option, the assignment clause and the security deposit from every one of them.

The legal points are in the same pile. A lease for more than a year must be made by registered instrument under section 107 of the Transfer of Property Act, and an unregistered one gives a much weaker position than the tenant believes.

How Justis handles it

Tabular review asks the same questions of every lease in the matter and returns a grid: one row per lease, one column per term, each cell with the clause and page it came from. You can add a column mid-review and export the grid to Excel.

Justis flags the leases that need attention: unregistered leases over a year, assignment or change-of-control clauses the transaction will trigger, lock-ins that end before the deal closes, and escalations that do not match the rent actually being paid.

The problem

A landowner is offered a joint development agreement: land in exchange for a share of the built-up area. The document decides who controls the approvals, what happens if the developer stalls, and whether the power of attorney the owner signs can be used to sell the owner's share.

Under RERA the landowner who shares in the built area can be treated as a promoter, with obligations to allottees, and the stamp duty on the agreement and the power of attorney depends on the state and on how much control passes.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the draft agreement, the power of attorney and the title file, and sets out the commercial and legal terms in one note: the sharing ratio, the timelines, the approvals, the default and termination rights, the scope of the power of attorney and the landowner's exposure as a promoter.

Against your landowner-side or developer-side playbook, it marks the clauses to change and drafts the revisions as tracked changes, including a power of attorney limited to the developer's share.

The problem

The buyer's lender wants a title report before it will sanction the home loan, and the seller has handed over a certified copy of the BDA sale deed, a registered partition deed, an encumbrance certificate, a khata certificate and four tax receipts. The report has to say who owns the site today, how they came to own it, what stands against it and what must be cured before registration.

The bundle rarely says what is missing. A partition between two brothers that recites them as the only heirs of their mother says nothing about a sister, and an encumbrance certificate that starts in 1998 says nothing about the nine years of the lease-cum-sale period before it.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the deeds, the search report, the encumbrance certificate and the khata papers, and drafts the title report in your format: the documents examined, the flow of title from the allotment to the present owner, the encumbrances, the revenue and tax position, and the opinion with its conditions. Every statement in the flow of title carries the document and page.

It flags what the bundle cannot support: an heir left out of a succession, a khata in one name where the deed vests the property in two, a registered agreement with a third party that was never cancelled, a period the search does not cover and an original deed that is not with the seller. The requisitions come back as a numbered list for the seller.

The problem

The broker's term sheet arrives with the parties, the price, the payment plan and a line asking purchasers' counsel to prepare the deed. Drafting from it alone is how errors reach the sub-registrar: the seller named is whoever the broker dealt with, the boundaries are as the seller remembers them, and a cash payment sits in the payment table as if it were routine.

The deed has to match the title papers, not the term sheet: the vendors must be everyone in whom title is vested, the schedule must follow the previous deeds, and the recitals must explain how each vendor came to own the property.

How Justis handles it

Justis drafts the sale deed in Word from the term sheet and the title documents together: parties, recitals tracing title, consideration and payment table, covenants for title and indemnity, possession, and the schedule taken from the root deed. Where the term sheet and the title papers disagree, the draft follows the papers and the covering note says why.

The covering note lists what has to be settled before execution: vendors or confirming parties to be added, payments that should not be made in cash, statements in the term sheet the record contradicts, and the value on which stamp duty will be charged.

The problem

A client relocating to Mumbai has agreed the rent on a call, and the owner's broker has sent an eleven-month leave and licence agreement on his own template. The client has agreed terms the draft does not reflect, and the draft carries clauses that would not survive a dispute.

In Maharashtra a leave and licence agreement must be in writing and registered under section 55 of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act 1999, which puts the responsibility for registration on the landlord. The same Act stops a landlord cutting off an essential supply without just cause, and fixes what a licensee who stays on must pay.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the draft against the client's instructions and the law, marks up the Word document with tracked changes, and adds a comment on each change saying whether it comes from the agreed terms or from the statute.

It also lists what the draft leaves out that the client asked for, such as a renewal option or protection if the flat is sold, with proposed wording, so the reply to the broker can go in one round.

The problem

Once a resale is registered, the buyers still have to be admitted to the housing society. The society's form asks for the seller's share certificate and distinctive numbers, the area in the society's records, the dues, the nominee, the buyers' details and the registration particulars, and the managing committee will refuse a form that does not match its register.

The data is spread over the registered agreement, the share certificate, the society's statement of dues and an intake sheet filled in a hurry, and the answers do not always agree.

How Justis handles it

Justis fills the society's Word form from those documents, field by field, and returns it as a completed document with each entry taken from the record and the source noted. Where two documents disagree it uses the society's own record for the society's fields and flags the conflict; where nothing on file answers a field it leaves the field blank and says what is needed.

It does not submit anything. The completed form and a short list of points to resolve go to the parties for signature.

The problem

A fund looking at a stalled tower, or a lender asked to finance its completion, needs to know what the promoter has promised to each allottee. Each agreement was signed in a different year on a different template: some follow the form in the state rules, some an older developer template, and a few were never registered.

The terms that decide the exposure are the same in every file: the carpet area sold, how much was taken before the agreement, the possession date, the delay compensation, the cancellation deduction and whether the agreement was registered.

How Justis handles it

Tabular review asks those questions of every agreement in the matter and returns one row per flat, each cell citing the clause and page. Agreements that depart from RERA stand out across the grid: an area given only as super built-up, an advance above the ten per cent that section 13 allows before a registered agreement, a possession date later than the one declared to the Authority, a capped delay compensation.

The grid exports to Excel for the deal team, and the exceptions become the list of claims the promoter faces.

The problem

An allottee has filed a complaint with the Authority claiming nineteen months of delay interest, possession without paying the last instalment and compensation for mental agony. The reply is due in three weeks, and the promoter's instructions are to deny any delay because the Authority extended the project's registration.

The reply has to be accurate about what the record shows, including the points that do not help the promoter. A defence the Authority will reject on its first reading costs credibility on the points the promoter can win.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the complaint, the agreement and the promoter's file, and sets each allegation against the record with the page: the possession date the agreement actually gives, the date of the occupancy certificate, the offer of possession, the demands and the allottee's refusal. It computes the delay the record supports, the amounts outstanding and the interest each side owes.

It drafts the reply in Word, para-wise, and a separate note to the client on where the promoter is exposed and which instructions the reply should not follow, so the client decides with the risk in front of it.