A purchaser from a judgment debtor during litigation cannot resist or obstruct execution of a decree, as all transactions made pendente lite are deemed invalid under the doctrine of lis pendens.

ORDER :

Challenging the order passed by the Executing Court in E.A.No.3 of 2023 in EP.No.36 of 2014, the present revision has been filed.

A. Factual Matrix

2. The first respondent has filed a suit in E.S.No.5 of 1999 on the file of the IV Judge, Small Causes Court at Chennai under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act for ejectment of the defendants contending that the plaintiff is the absolute owner of the suit property measuring 2565 sq.ft., situated in Old Survey No.37/20, New T.S.No.43, Block No.1, Kodambakkam Village, bearing Door No.19, Alagar Perumal Koil Street, Vadapalani, Chennai. The plaintiff inherited the suit property from his father. The first defendant Y.S.R.Moorthy (Deceased) has entered into a lease agreement with the plaintiff's father on 23.11.1956 and till the life-time of plaintiff's father, the first defendant was a tenant having put up a construction on the demise land and residing therein. After the demise of the plaintiff's father on 26.06.1977, the plaintiff became the absolute owner of the suit land the the first defendant continued to pay the lease rentals. As per lease agreement dated 23.11.1956, the monthly rent was Rs.3/- per month. The first defendant had been paying the monthly rent irregularly till January 1988 and defaulted from 01.02.1988. Thus, the plaintiff issued notice dated 26.11.1992 calling upon the first defendant to surrender vacant possession. However, in the meanwhile, the first defendant had illegally parted with the possession of the schedule land in favour of the defendants 2 and 3. Hence, the suit was filed for ejectment.

3. Written statement was filed by the defendants 1 and 2. According to them, the first defendant was enjoying the property from the year 1950 and patta was obtained in his name. The first defendant sold the property by registered sale deed dated 27.05.1998 and the defendants 2 and 3 have obtained patta in their names. Hence, sought for dismissal of the suit.

4. The defendants remained exparte. On the side of the plaintiff, plaintiff was examined as PW1 and Exs.A1 to A7 were marked. The Trial Court framed the issues and considering the Ex.A1/lease agreement decreed the suit holding that since the first defendant has accepted the relationship between the plaintiff, the first defendant is estopped from denying the title and claiming title on himself.

The decree and judgment was passed on 04.11.2013.

5. Subsequently, the revision petitioners and the respondents 7 to 9 have filed petition in MP.Nos.3126 of 2014 and 3127 of 2014 to implead themselves as the defendants 6 to 13 and to set aside the exparte decree dated 04.11.2013 and the same was dismissed by the Trial Court vide order dated 25.02.2016.

6. When the above decree was put into execution in EP.No.36 of 2014 by the first respondent, the revision petitioners and the respondents 7 to 9 have filed application in E.A.No.31 of 2014 under Order 1 Rule 10(1) of CPC for impleading themselves as the defendants 6 to 13 and the same was dismissed by the Execution Court vide order dated 02.11.2016. Challenging the same, revision was filed in CRP.No.3477 of 2016 and the same was allowed vide order dated 03.03.2023. Accordingly, the revision petitioners are arrayed as the judgment debtors 8 to 11 and the respondents 7 to 9 are the judgment debtors 6, 7 & 12.

7. Thereafter, the revision petitioners filed application in E.A.No.3 of 2023 under Section 47 read with Section 74 of CPC to declare that the above decree and judgment as against the suit property will not be binding and enforceable as against the petitioners, wherein, it is the contention of the revision petitioners that one Guruvan Ayyavu, the predecessor in title has acquired ownership over 50% undivided interest in the suit property by virtue of sale deed dated 10.07.2013 in Doc.No.1804 of 2013. Similarly, one R.Indra, the other predecessor in title has acquired ownership over 50% undivided interest in the suit property by virtue of sale deed dated 10.