1. The locus-standi of the pendente-lite purchaser to raise the plea/defence of bonafide purchaser for value without notice of earlier transaction (a plea which is available to a purchaser, but not during the pending litigation) is under challenge. The protection under Section 19(b) of the Specific Relief Act is not available to a pendente-lite purchaser by virtue of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, is the main contention raised in the second appeal. In other words, the contention is that Section 19 (1) of the Specific Relief Act, does not over ride Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act.

1.1. There may be innocent purchasers who purchase the property bonafide without notice of the earlier agreement/transaction. These purchasers might have purchased it either during pending litigation or no litigation pending. With regard to pending litigation, the subsequent purchasers may have notice or may not have the notice of the lis. Still the protection available to a purchaser during non-litigation period is not available to a purchaser during litigation is the main contention raised in this second appeal.

1.2. In the event of conflict between, the doctrine of lis