Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Sakthivel, Devaraj
M.D.Sampathkumar – Appellant
Versus
DEVARAJ – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. borrowing and repayment arrangements. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. denial of loan and allegations regarding property. (Para 4) |
| 3. second defendant's defense against the loan. (Para 5) |
| 4. trial court's findings on the loan agreement. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 5. substantial questions of law admitted. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. procedural arguments and application issues. (Para 12 , 30) |
| 7. evidence and presumption of validity of promissory note. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. section 128 holds universal donee liable for donor's debts. (Para 19 , 24) |
| 9. universal donee's liability under the transfer of property act. (Para 21 , 22 , 26) |
| 10. bona fide purchaser doctrine and its application. (Para 27 , 28 , 34) |
| 11. the appeal dismissal confirms lower court's findings regarding debts. (Para 32) |
| 12. conclusion regarding liability of defendants. (Para 35) |
| 13. final judgment on the appeal. (Para 36) |
JUDGMENT :
R.Sakthivel, J.
This Second Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated October 1, 2019 passed in A.S.No.19 of 2016 by the 'III Additional District & Sessions Court, Erode at Gobichettipalayam' ['First Appellate Court' for brevity], whereby the Judgment and Decree dated June 17, 2016 passed in O.S.No.56 of 2008 b
Universal donees are personally liable for the debts of the donor as per Section 128 of the Transfer of Property Act, overriding any claim of absolute ownership under the Hindu Succession Act in cert....
During pendency in any court having authority within limits of India of any suit or proceeding which is not collusive and in which any right to immovable property is directly and specifically in ques....
(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....
The doctrine of lis pendens applies to subsequent purchasers; their rights are subordinate to those of the decree holder in a specific performance case.
The Court emphasized the importance of summary determination of questions under Rule 101 of Order XXI of the C.P.C. and the applicability of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. It also clarif....
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.
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....
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
