The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of S.52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the doctrine of lis pendens in property disputes, emphasizing the material date for determining the applicability of the rule and the necessity of preventing interference with court decrees.

1. The 3rd plaintiff (additional) in O.S. No. 112 of 1095 of the District Court of Kottayam is the appellant before us. In execution of the decree in the suit the appellant applied for delivery of one acre of property in survey plot No. 201/1 of the Kanjirappally North Pakuthy together with the building thereon. The contentions of the respondent (102nd defendant) as summarised by the court below are:

"That the 35th defendant, his father, had no rights over the property even on the date of the suit, that the 35th defendant has gifted this property under Ext. I to himself and his mother on 3.6.1095, long before the suit, that the mother in turn gifted her rights over the property to him under Ext. II in 1101, that ever since that date, he is in possession of the property in his own independent title, that neither he nor his mother was a party to this decree, that the decree is not binding on him and his property and that therefore the plaintiff is not entitled to get possession of the property."

2. The only question, as can be seen from the summary of contentions extracted above, that arises for consideration is whether the gift deed Ext. I is affected by the rule of lis pendens. Ext. I is dated 3.6.1095. The suit was originally filed in the Kanjirappally Munsiff's Court on 10.10.1092 and if 10.10.1092 is the material date there can be no doubt that Ext. I has to be treated as affected by the said rule.

3. The plaint, however, was returned for want of pecuniary jurisdiction for presentation to the proper court and was filed in the District Court of Kottayam only on 29.11.1095. If 29.11.1095 is the material date then it is equally clear that Ext. I is not affected by the rule and that the conclusion of the lower court to that effect has to be sustained.

4. S.52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, reads as follows:

"During the active prosecution in any Court having authority in British India or established beyond the limits of British India by the Governor-General in Council, of a contentious suit or proceeding in which any right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein, except under the authority of the Court and on such terms as it may impose."

The section was amended by Act 20 of 1929 by substituting the word "pendency" for the words "active prosecution" and the words "any suit or proceeding which is not collusive" for the words "a contentious suit or proceeding" and by the addition of an Explanation which fixes the time during which a suit is deemed to be pending for the purposes of the section. The section as amended reads as follows:

"During the pendency in any Court having authority within the limits of India excluding the State of Jammu and Kashmir or established beyond such limits by the Central Government of any suit or proceeding which is not collusive and in which any right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any part to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein, except under the authority of the Court and on such terms as it may impose.

Explanation For the purposes of this section the pendency of a suit or proceeding shall be deemed to commence from the date of the presentation of the plaint or the institution of the proceeding in a Court of competent jurisdiction, and to continue until the suit or proceeding has been disposed of by a final decree or order and complete satisfaction or discharge of such decree or order has been obtained, or has become unobtainable by reason of the expiration of any period of limitation prescribed for the execution thereof by any law for the time being in force."

5. There was no Trans