Conversion for Reservation Benefits Is a Fraud on the Constitution: Supreme Court Rejects SC Certificate for Reconverted Christian Patent Office Guidelines Must Be Followed for Consistency in Decisions: Madras High Court Limitation Cannot Obstruct Justice When Parties Consent to Extensions: Madhya Pradesh High Court Additional Fees Are Incentives, Not Penalties: Orissa High Court Upholds Central Motor Vehicles Rules Amendment Interpretation of Tender Eligibility Criteria Lies with Tendering Authority: Gujrat High Court Upholds Discharge of Tender Complaints Were Contradictory and Did Not Establish Prima Facie Case for SC/ST Act Charges: J&K HC Insurance Cover Notes Hold Policy Validity Unless Proven Otherwise: Kerala High Court Upholds Compensation in Fatal Accident Case Article 21 Of Constitution Applies Irrespective Of Nature Of Crime. Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Amounts To Punishment Without Adjudication: Calcutta HC Concept Of 'Liberal Approach' Cannot Be Used To Jettison The Substantive Law Of Limitation: Delhi High Court Limitation is Not Always a Mixed Question of Fact and Law: Bombay High Court Dismisses 31-Year-Old Specific Performance Suit as Time-Barred Intent Coupled with Trespass Constitutes Full Offence: Supreme Court Mere Possession of Bribe Money Insufficient Without Proof of Demand and Acceptance: Supreme Court Right to Promotion is Not a Fundamental Right; Retrospective Benefits Without Service Cannot Be Granted: Supreme Court of India Oral Gift Validity in Mohammedan Law: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Constructive Possession and Injunction Unauthorized Construction on Government Irrigation Land Must Be Demolished: Calcutta High Court Directs Sub-Divisional Officer High Court Upholds Dismissal of Petition Over Road Obstruction Due to Non-Prosecution Victim of Rape Has Right to Bodily Integrity and Reproductive Choice: Gujarat High Court Permits Termination of 24-Week Pregnancy Contradictions In Eyewitness Accounts And Suppression Of Crucial Evidence Weaken The Prosecution's Case: Telangana High Court High Court of Sikkim Sets Aside Trial Court’s Decision on Maintainability of Suit: Preliminary Issues Must Be Purely of Law Courts Must Focus on Substance Over Procedure, Says High Court Writ Petitions Against Civil Court Orders Must Be Under Article 227: Patna High Court Reiterates Jurisdictional Boundaries Kerala High Court Upholds Eviction, Rejects Sub-Tenant's Kudikidappu Claim Contractual Employment Does Not Confer Right to Regularization: Jharkhand High Court Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act for Past Domestic Violence: Bombay High Court Tenants Cannot Prescribe How Landlords Utilize Their Property: Delhi High Court Validates Eviction Labour Commissioner to Decide Petitioner’s Date of Birth Claim within Three Months, Ensuring Proper Verification and Consideration of Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Concealment of Health Condition and False Allegations Amount to Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Possession Implies Constructive Notice: Duty to Inquire Rests on Subsequent Purchasers: Supreme Court Clarifies Bona Fide Purchase Standards

Transactions During the Pendency of Litigation Are Generally Voidable and Subject to Final Decree – Supreme Court Upholds Doctrine of Lis Pendens

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has reinforced the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which mandates that any transfer of property during the pendency of litigation is generally voidable and contingent on the outcome of the case.

The matter pertains to an appeal against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s decision that reversed lower courts’ findings and dismissed a suit for specific performance regarding a property transaction between Chander Bhan (the appellant, represented posthumously through Sher Singh) and Mukhtiar Singh along with others (respondents). The contention revolved around whether the transactions conducted during the pendency of an injunction suit were valid and whether the subsequent purchasers could be considered bonafide under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act.

Doctrine of Lis Pendens: The Supreme Court highlighted that transactions executed after the imposition of a temporary injunction fall squarely within the ambit of lis pendens, rendering any subsequent transactions voidable. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia noted, “the integrity of judicial processes must be upheld, and litigants cannot undermine it through subsequent transactions.”

Status of Bonafide Purchasers: In scrutinizing the High Court’s assessment that respondents 1 and 2 were bonafide purchasers, the Supreme Court underscored that such a status is untenable when the purchase violates established principles of lis pendens. “Being unaware of litigation does not confer bona fide status to purchasers if the transaction itself is mired in legal proceedings,” Justice Dhulia remarked.

Impact of the Temporary Injunction: The apex court criticized the High Court’s interpretation and emphasized that the temporary injunction was effective from the filing date of the suit, thereby impacting all subsequent transactions.

Adverse Inference Against Respondents: The Supreme Court also supported the lower court’s decision to draw an adverse inference against respondents 3 and 4, who refrained from testifying, reinforcing the importance of direct involvement in the legal process.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court’s judgment. The decree for specific performance initially issued by the trial court was reinstated, compelling respondent no. 3 to complete the sale agreement in favor of the appellant.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

Chander Bhan (D) Through LR Sher Singh vs. Mukhtiar Singh & Ors

Similar News