If the grantee of the vendor takes the title from the vendor for value without knowledge of the prior contract he can retain it and the vendee has no remedy against him,14 but would, of course, have his remedy in damages against the vendor.

The court held that under the statute providing that when a person is seized of an estate upon a trust, express or implied, and is outside the state and not amenable to the process of any court therein having equity powers, this court shall have power to order a conveyance to be made and may appoint some suitable person to convey the premises; this court has adequate power to enforce the specific performance of a land contract even though the defendant resides outside the state.

Clem v. Given's Ex'r, 106 Va. 145. Defendant had entered into contract with plaintiff for the sale of certain land and he now refuses to convey. Defendant resided outside the state. Plaintiff filed a bill for specific performance. There was a statute which provided that where the title to real estate was involved and the owner lived outside the state he could be brought In by publication.

The court held that a state has a perfect right to pass such a law; that a state has control over property within its limits and the condition of ownership of real estate therein, whether the owner be a stranger or citizen state can determine the extent of a stranger's title to real estate within its limits and for the purpose of such determination may provide any reasonable method of imparting notice.

Minero v. Ross & Masterson, 138

S. W. 224. Paragraph 20: If a suit for the specific performance of a land contract be instituted by the vendee who is offering to pay the purchase price, the court having jurisdiction of the land but the defendant living in a foreign coun try or state outside the jurisdiction of the court; such action even though the defendant were served only with constructive process would be regarded as an action in rem rather than in personam and specific performance would be enforced.

Hollander v. Central Metal & Supply Co., 71 Atl. 442, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1135. On a bill filed for the specific performance of a land contract where the defendant was a non-resident of the state and service was had by publication the defendant claimed that specific performance was an action in personam and service could not be had by publication.

The court held that under the state statute the court may order notice to be given non-resident defendants and said notice may be given by publication. The non-resident cannot be compelled to execute a deed but the court may appoint a trustee to convey the non-resident's title and to that end the proceedings are in rem and not in personam and therefore sustainable by publication.

14. Pomeroy Equity Jur., 2nd Ed., Sec. 2275.

If the assignee of the vendor take a conveyance of the property with notice of the outstanding contract,15 or is not a purchaser for value 16 then the vendee of the contract may enforce same against such grantee. On the question of notice it has been frequently held that possession by a party under a land contract is notice to the world of his rights under that contract,17 and that such possession may be either in person or by tenant,18 it would therefore follow that if the vendee or his tenant was in possession under the land contract any purchaser from the vendor would be charged with notice of the vendee's interest in the contract.

Unless the contract contains a covenant against assignment, on the part of the purchaser his vendee or assignee may enforce specific performance against the grantee of the vendor, as, whoever takes the land, takes it subject to the terms of the outstanding land contract.