Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

Doctrine of Lis Pendens Cannot Be an Engine of Fraud: High Court Sets Aside Trial Court’s Order in Land Sale Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Chhattisgarh has overturned a decision of the Second Additional District Judge, Durg, in the much-discussed land sale case (FA No. 16 of 2023). The case, which has garnered attention due to its complex legal implications involving property laws and principles of civil procedure, reached a pivotal moment on November 10, 2023, with the High Court’s pronouncement.

The Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Goutam Bhaduri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari challenged the trial court’s earlier order, which dismissed a suit filed for declaration & injunction by the appellants/plaintiffs. The suit’s dismissal was initially based on the application of Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

In a statement that underscores the crux of their decision, the Bench observed, “The principle of ‘finality of litigation’ cannot be pressed to the extent of such an absurdity that it becomes an engine of fraud in the hands of dishonest litigants.” This observation highlights the court’s stance on the misuse of legal doctrines to perpetrate fraud.

The case revolved around the sale of property during the pendency of an earlier suit and raised critical questions about the application of the doctrine of lis pendens – a principle that prohibits the transfer of a property under dispute during litigation. The High Court, in its judgment, emphasized the need for a meticulous examination of facts and legal principles, especially when allegations of fraud are involved in obtaining a compromise decree.

Advocates representing both sides presented their arguments, with Mr. B.P. Sharma leading the counsel for the appellants. The High Court’s decision to set aside the trial court’s order and direct further proceedings indicates a significant shift in the case’s trajectory, potentially impacting the doctrine’s application in future property disputes

Date of Decision: 10-11-2023

Mehul Kumar Patel  VS Rishikesh Gupta

Similar News