Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SANDEEP JAIN
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Tejveer Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. written statements and claims of the defendants. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. court's analysis on evidence and issues framed. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 4. court's analysis and reasoning on property law. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 5. final legal reasoning and court conclusion. (Para 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 69 , 70) |
| 6. final judgment and orders by the court. (Para 71 , 72) |
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep Jain, J.
1. The instant appeal under Section 96 CPC has been preferred by the plaintiff against the impugned judgment and decree dated 30.9.1986 passed by the Court of 7th Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad in O.S. No. 200 of 1982 Ashok Kumar vs. Tejvir Singh and others , whereby the plaintiff 's suit for the relief of specific performance of agreement for sale and possession dated 03.9.1981 has been dismissed and the suit for the alternative relief, for the recovery of Rs. 41,000/- , i.e. earnest money paid by the plaintiff to the defendant no
The doctrine of lis pendens overrides the rights of bona fide purchasers when they acquire property during pending litigation concerning the same property, as established by case law.
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....
The court reaffirmed the doctrine of lis pendens in specific performance cases, establishing that subsequent purchasers with knowledge of prior agreements cannot claim independent rights.
Appellate courts must uphold trial court findings unless explicitly challenged; sales during ongoing litigation violate the principle of lis pendens.
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.
Subsequent purchasers will be bound by lis pendens.
The plaintiff's assertion of readiness and willingness in specific performance claims must be continuous and substantiated; the burden lies on the party contesting the agreement's legitimacy.
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
