Back
HRISHIKESH ROY, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Shingara Singh – Appellant
Versus
Daljit Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J.
1. The defendant No. 2 in the suit has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the High Court allowing the appeal preferred by the plaintiff/Daljit Singh to set aside the judgment and decree of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court which concurrently decreed the suit partially only for the alternative relief of recovery of Rs. 40,000/- along with interest while dismissing the suit in respect of specific performance of the agreement dated 17.08.1990.
2. The facts of the case emerging from the pleadings of the parties are that plaintiff/Daljit Singh instituted the suit on 24.12.1992 claiming specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 17.08.1990 in respect of the land measuring 79 Kanals 09 marlas @ of Rs. 80,000/- per acre against the payment of earnest money of Rs. 40,000/- and the balance amount of Rs. 7,54,000/- at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed on or before 30.11.1992.
3. According to the plaintiff, he remained present in the office of the Sub-Registrar on 30.11.1992 with the balance sale consideration and all the expenses for stamp papers but defendant no. 1 did not turn up to
Agreement to sell – Suit for Specific Performance – Once sale agreement is proved and subsequent sale was during pendency of suit hit by doctrine of lis pendens, decree for specific performance can b....
Appellate courts must uphold trial court findings unless explicitly challenged; sales during ongoing litigation violate the principle of lis pendens.
Subsequent purchasers will be bound by lis pendens.
The doctrine of lis pendens overrides the rights of bona fide purchasers when they acquire property during pending litigation concerning the same property, as established by case law.
A pendente lite purchaser cannot assert independent title in execution proceedings, as the doctrine of lis pendens prevails over claims of bona fide purchasers under the Specific Relief Act.
The doctrine of lis pendens does not affect prior subsisting rights, allowing innocent purchasers to enforce their claims based on preceding agreements.
(1) Lis Pendens – Purpose of lis pendens is to ensure that process of court is not subverted and rendered infructuous – Section 52 of T.P. Act would apply to third-party purchaser.(2) Review Jurisdic....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
