Back
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C. Chinnappa – Appellant
Versus
Jayamma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(V. Lakshminarayanan, J.)
(Prayer : Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the Judgment and decree dated 19.07.2013 made in A.S.No.30 of 2011 on the file of the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Hosur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 15-12-2005 made in O.S.No.128 of 2005 on the file of the Court of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai.)
This case has a checkered history. The suit schedule mentioned properties are items belonging to one Chinna Mallegoudu @ Mallaiah. Mallaiah and his wife Ammaiakka @ Puttamma had one son by name Puttiah and 5 daughters namely Mallamma (deceased), Jayamma, Devarajamma, Dhakshayini @ Sulochana and Nirmala. Mallamma seems to have passed away leaving behind her husband Mahadevan and three daughters namely Sailashri, Bhuvanashri, Sudhashri as her legal heirs.
2. Tmt.Mallamma filed a suit for partition and separate possession in O.S.No.105 of 1974 on the file of the District Munsif Court at Hosur. She sought for the relief of partition by metes and bounds and separate possession o
A second suit for partition is not maintainable if the property has already been partitioned and a decree has been finalized; a lis pendens purchaser has the right to appeal against a decree affectin....
The court ruled that a second suit for partition is not maintainable if a previous decree regarding the same property exists, emphasizing the rights of a lis pendens purchaser to appeal.
A second suit for partition is not maintainable concerning property previously partitioned; purchasers under lis pendens retain the right to appeal against decrees affecting their interests.
The court reaffirms that a sale pending litigation is not void but does not bind the party in the pending suit, allowing partial claims based on property allocation.
(1) Lis Pendens – Section 52 of T.P. Act has no application where transfer in favour of subsequent purchaser is not after filing of suit but before filing of suit for specific performance.(2) Resista....
Subsequent purchasers of property cannot independently challenge a partition decree that has attained finality; their rights are limited to those of the transferor.
The doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act binds purchasers to the outcomes of ongoing litigation concerning the property, negating claims of bona fide purchase with....
The court affirmed that a decree binds successors-in-interest unless declared void, and collusion in prior judgments affects the applicability of the doctrine of lis pendens.
Purchasers of undivided shares in a partition suit, who bought the property prior to the suit, are necessary parties in the final decree proceedings and are entitled to work out their remedy.
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
