AI Overview...
-
Pendency of Suit and Purchaser’s Rights - The general principle is that the pendency of a suit does not bar a person from purchasing the property, provided the transferor has the legal right to sell. If the transferor succeeds in the suit, the purchaser also gains rights; otherwise, the sale may be invalid. However, transactions during the pendency are subject to the rule of lis pendens, which can affect their validity and protection for bona fide purchasers. Syed Basheer Malik VS Jameela Begum - Karnataka, A. R. Mohamed Hanifa VS Abdul Rahim - Madras, Venkateswara Rao VS Edavalli Raji Reddy - Andhra Pradesh, M. Jayakumar VS Minor Geetha & Others - Madras
-
Bona Fide Purchaser and Sale During Pendency - Courts have held that a sale executed during the pendency of a suit can be challenged if it is not in good faith or if the transferor lacked clear title. Bona fide purchasers who are unaware of the litigation may be protected, but if the purchaser has knowledge of the suit or the defect in title, their rights are limited. SHINGARA SINGH vs DALJIT SINGH - Supreme Court, Soundarrajan VS Vettobai - Madras, M. Jayakumar VS Minor Geetha & Others - Madras
-
Effect of Litigation on Transfers - The rule of lis pendens generally restricts the transfer of property during the pendency of a suit, especially if the transfer is made with knowledge of the litigation. Such transfers are often considered hit by the rule, and subsequent purchasers may not be protected if they had notice of the suit. A. R. Mohamed Hanifa VS Abdul Rahim - Madras, Sukhdev Singh VS Mohan Singh - Punjab and Haryana, M. Jayakumar VS Minor Geetha & Others - Madras
-
Specific Cases and Judicial View - Courts have emphasized that if the person from whom the property is purchased succeeds in the suit, the purchaser's rights are protected. Conversely, if the transferor loses the suit, the sale may be invalid, especially if the purchaser was aware of the suit or transaction irregularities. SREEKALA vs CHELLAPPAN PILLAI - Madras, Syed Basheer Malik VS Jameela Begum - Karnataka, Soundarrajan VS Vettobai - Madras
Analysis and Conclusion:
The key insight is that during the pendency of a suit, the validity of property transfers depends on the knowledge and good faith of the purchaser, as well as the legal status of the transferor. Purchases made without knowledge of the ongoing litigation and in good faith are more likely to be protected, but courts remain cautious about transactions during the pendency, especially if they violate the rule of lis pendens. Ultimately, if the transferor's title is upheld in the suit, the purchaser's rights are strengthened; if not, the sale can be annulled. The timing of the purchase relative to the suit's progress and the purchaser's awareness are critical factors influencing the outcome.
Search Results for "Less Pendency the Suit Property was Purchased by the One of the Defendant"
2012 0 Supreme(Mad) 3910 • India - Madras
M.VENUGOPAL
property claimed by the Defendants are two different properties and not one and the same property? ... The Defendant/2nd Respondent claimed title to the property and filed a suit for declaration of title and possession. ... The Defendant/2nd Respondent filed a Second Appeal. ... The Written Statement averments of the Appellant/2nd Defendant: ... (i) During the pendency of suit, the Appellant/2nd....
2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 11046 • India - Supreme Court of India
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
The defendant No. 2 claimed to have purchased the land without knowledge of the prior agreement. ... No. 2 claimed to be a bona fide purchaser - High Court found that the sale deed executed during the pendency of the suit was hit ... of an agreement to sell land, claiming the defendant failed to execute the sale deed despite readiness to perform. ... The principle underlying Section 52 is that a litigating party is exempted from taking notice of a title acquired during the pe....
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 137 • India - High Court of Madras
Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.VIJAYAKUMAR
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the present revision petitioner is a purchaser from the 1st defendant pending execution ... proceedings, and therefore, she is deriving her rights only from the 1st defendant. ... The suit was decreed on 18.12.1991. ... The learned counsel appearing for the respondents / decree holders had contended that the present revision petitioner, namely Sreekala is not a third party to the suit. She has purchased the property from #....
2015 0 Supreme(Kar) 1226 • India - Karnataka
N.KUMAR, B.VEERAPPA
If the person from whom the property is purchased succeeds in the suit, the purchaser succeeds. ... The mere pendency of the suit does not prevent one of the parties from dealing with the property constituting the subject matter ... The pendency of the suit would not come in the way of his acquiring such right, if the transferor ha may any such right. ... of Defendant No. 5 in all the properties, ....
1969 0 Supreme(Cal) 263 • India - Calcutta
AMARESH ROY, S.N.BAGCHI
During the pendency of the suit, Defendant No. 3, wife of Defendant No. 2, purchased the share of one of the plaintiffs, Ayesha Khatun ... A decree for eviction against a co-sharer purchaser of the landlord's share during the pendency of the suit cannot be sustained. ... Whether a decree for eviction against a co-sharer purchaser of the landlord's share during the pendency of the suit#HL....
2018 0 Supreme(AP) 965 • India - Andhra Pradesh
B.SIVA SANKARA RAO
Whether the 1st defendant purchased the land from the original owner and obtained a registered sale deed in 1984, making him a bona ... property and was dispossessed by the defendants in 1974. ... The defendants denied the plaintiff's claim, asserting that they purchased the land from the original owner and obtained a registered ... What PW-5 deposed of purchased property from Edunuthula Papi Reddy not challenged even by suggestion of Edunuthula Papi....
2009 0 Supreme(Mad) 5523 • India - Madras
B.RAJENDRAN
for specific performance of a sale agreement dated 27.05.1987, claiming that the first defendant agreed to sell the suit property ... The first defendant subsequently sold the property to the fourth defendant by means of a sale deed dated 07.01.1988, after executing ... Specific Performance - Sale Agreement - Ex.A4 - Ex.B2 - Ex.B1 - Ex.A5 - Ex.A6 - Ex.A7 - Encumbrance - Bonafide Purchaser - Minor's ... Admittedly the mortgage in respect of the suit p....
1950 0 Supreme(Nagpur) 7 • India - Nagpur
BOSE, MUDHOLKAR
Whether the Collector had the right to resell the property in execution of Defendant 1's decree after it had been sold and purchased ... The property was then put up for sale again, this time subject to the lease, and was purchased by the Plaintiffs themselves. ... Defendant 1 applied to the Collector to terminate the lease and resell the property, which the Collector did after obtaining an order ... It is only if the execution-debt is less than the ....
2011 0 Supreme(P&H) 1437 • India - Punjab and Haryana
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
--They can only watch their interest alongwith other defendants, from whom, they had purchased the land, during the pendency of the ... the land in dispute during the pendency of the suit, in order to illegally defeat the rights of the plaintiff--Not only that, it ... pendency of the suit and their transactions are hit by rule of lis-pendens, then question of their bona fide purchasers and protection ... They were stated to have purchased the #HL_STA....
2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 575 • India - Madras
N.SATHISH KUMAR
Sake of convenience - Specific performance for sale - Executed registered sale agreement - Cross examination - 1st defendant ... The 2nd defendant, who purchased part of the property as nominee of the plaintiff, is aware of the existence of the agreement between the parties and hence, he is not a bonafide purchaser. ... It is the case of the plaintiff that the 2nd defendant has purchased the remaining cents of the property, knowing the existence of t....
Filter by Legal Phrase
