Upon the execution of the conveyance the purchaser is, as a general rule, entitled to have the title deeds delivered to him; and an order for their delivery, if not provided for in the order for payment of the purchase-money, may be obtained on motion (g): on a sale in lots, in the absence of special agreement, the purchaser of the largest lot is entitled to the deeds as against the purchaser of Party refusing may be declared a trustee.

Purchaser after conveyance executed may claim the deeds.

287, et vide supra, p. 312; but see now the Trustee Act, 1850, sects. 29 and 30: quaere, whether under the 1 Will. IV. c. 47, and the 3 & 4 Will. IV. c. 104, the Court can sell copyholds; see Branch v. Browne, 12 Jur. 768, V. C. K. B.

(z) Thomas v. Gwynne, 8 Beav. 312; and see Re Beech, 4 Madd. 128.

(a) Jordan v. Jones, 2 Ph. 170; Billing v. Webb, 1 De G. & S. 716; and see Jumpson v. Pitchers, 1 Coll. 13; Hood v. Hall, 14 Jur. 127, V. C. W.

(b) Walters v. Jackson, 12 Sim. 278; Warburton v. Vaughan, 4 Y. & C. 247; Thomas v. Gwynne, 9 Beav. 275.

(c) In re Blake, 3 J. & L. 265.

(d) In re Milfield, 2 Ph. 254.

(e) See cases cited in last four notes; and King v. Leach, 2 Ha. 57; Robinson v. Wood, 5 Beav. 246; Jackson v. Milfield, 5 Ha. 538; In re Blackwell, 7 Jur. 9, V. C. E.; Barfield v. Rogers, 8 Jur. 229, C.

(f) Sects. 29 and 30.

(g) Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1204.

The purchaser is also, in the absence of stipulation, entitled to attested copies and a covenant for the production of the originals of such documents of title as are not delivered to him (k): it may however be remarked that, in Dare v. Tucker (l), Lord Eldon qualified his order for delivery of attested copies by the expression, "unless you leave the originals, or make some other proposal in the Master's office:" so that possibly, upon a sale by the Court, a deposit of the deeds in the Master's office might be sufficient to preclude the right to attested copies; but such a deposit could probably not be enforced against a purchaser who had purchased to an amount exceeding that of any other purchaser, and the part (if any) remaining unsold.

Where the estate is sold in accordance with the decree, the Court "will protect the purchaser against the parties to the suit, and all parties coming in under the decree (m);" and Sir E. Sugden considers it to be a general rule "that the purchaser shall not lose the benefit of his purchase by any irregularity in the proceedings in a cause (n):" if, however, the Court clearly exceed its jurisdiction, as if it assume to sell the real estate of infants upon the mere notion that a sale is beneficial (o), or, as against cestuis que trust not sui juris, to anticipate, without special grounds, the time fixed by the author of the trust for the sale of the estate (p), it is not clear that the purchaser would be protected by the decree; at any rate he will not be compelled to accept the title: and a purchaser is always bound to see that the sale is according to the decree (q); although he is not bound to see that no more property is sold than will be sufficient for the purposes for which a sale was directed (r); nor will he, it would seem, be affected by fraud in the proceedings of which he himself is innocent (s). Of course, the decree is no protection against persons who ought to have been, but are not, parties to the suit (t).

As to attested copies.

Will be protected against all parties to the suit.

Unless Court exceed its jurisdiction.

(h) Kinnard v. Christie, cited Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1205.

(i) Stubbs v. Sargon, 4 Beav. 90.

(j) Livesey v. Harding, 1 Beav. 343, 346.

(k) As to the qualification of this right, vide supra, p. 316.

(l) 6 Ves. 460.

(m) Sug. 69.

(n) Sug. 67, and cases there cited; Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1201; and see Baker v. Sowter, 10 Beav. 343.

A purchaser, after conveyance, has been allowed compensation out of his purchase-money, on the ground of the rent of the estate having been overstated in the particulars (u).