Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

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

Latest Legal News