Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Injunction Suit Involving Lis Pendens Transfer. Transfer of Suit Property During Pendency of Appeal Attracts Doctrine of Lis Pendens Under Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The respondent filed a suit for injunction against Mohd.Osman, which was decreed on 1.4.2006. Mohd.Osman appealed on 15.4.2006. During the pendency of the appeal, he sold the suit property to Hanifabegum vide registered sale deed dated 1.6.2006. Hanifabegum applied to be impleaded as appellant in place of Mohd.Osman under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC. The application was allowed, Mohd.Osman was deleted, and Hanifabegum continued the appeal. The District Court dismissed the appeal. In second appeal, the High Court considered whether the appeal abated against Mohd.Osman and whether Hanifabegum could be impleaded. The court held that the transfer during pendency of appeal is hit by lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the transferee is entitled to be brought on record under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC. The appeal does not abate against the original appellant. The court allowed the second appeal, set aside the District Court's judgment, and remanded the matter for fresh hearing on merits.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Impleadment of Transferee Pendente Lite - Order 22 Rule 10 CPC - Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Section 52 - The transferee of suit property during pendency of appeal sought impleadment under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC. The court held that the transferee is entitled to be brought on record as the transfer is hit by lis pendens and the appeal does not abate against the original appellant who transferred the property. (Paras 4-6)

B) Transfer of Property - Lis Pendens - Section 52 Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Transfer of suit property during pendency of appeal is subject to the doctrine of lis pendens. The transferee is bound by the decree and can continue the appeal. (Paras 4-6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the transferee of suit property during pendency of appeal can be impleaded under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC and whether the appeal abates against the original appellant who transferred the property.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The second appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the District Court are set aside. The appeal is restored to the file of the District Court for fresh hearing on merits. The District Court is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously.

Law Points

  • Doctrine of lis pendens
  • Order 22 Rule 10 CPC
  • Section 52 Transfer of Property Act
  • 1882
  • Transfer pendente lite
  • Impleadment of transferee
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2010 LawText (BOM) (09) 10

Second Appeal No.372 of 2010

2010-09-30

S.V.Gangapurwala

Mr.M.M.Patil (Beedkar) for appellant, Mr.P.N.Kalani for respondent

Hanifa Begum W/o Mehboob Khan

Dr.Devid S/o Premkumar D.F. Sundersingh

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Second appeal against dismissal of appeal in a suit for injunction.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the judgment of the District Court dismissing the appeal and to restore the appeal for hearing on merits.

Filing Reason

The District Court dismissed the appeal without considering the merits, possibly due to the transfer of property.

Previous Decisions

The trial court decreed the suit for injunction on 1.4.2006. The appeal filed by Mohd.Osman was dismissed by the District Court. The present second appeal is against that dismissal.

Issues

Whether the appeal abated against the original appellant Mohd.Osman after he transferred the suit property? Whether the transferee Hanifabegum could be impleaded under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC? Whether the transfer of suit property during pendency of appeal is hit by lis pendens?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the transfer was during pendency of appeal and thus hit by lis pendens, and the transferee is entitled to continue the appeal. Respondent argued that the appeal abated against Mohd.Osman and the transferee cannot be impleaded.

Ratio Decidendi

A transfer of property during the pendency of a suit or appeal is governed by the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The transferee is entitled to be brought on record under Order 22 Rule 10 CPC and can continue the proceedings. The appeal does not abate against the original appellant who transferred the property.

Judgment Excerpts

The transfer of the suit property during the pendency of the appeal is hit by the doctrine of lis pendens. The transferee is entitled to be brought on record under Order 22 Rule 10 of the C.P.C.

Procedural History

Suit for injunction decreed on 1.4.2006. Appeal filed on 15.4.2006. During appeal, property sold to Hanifabegum on 1.6.2006. Hanifabegum impleaded as appellant. District Court dismissed appeal. Second appeal filed in High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 22 Rule 10
  • Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Section 52
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against Framing of Charges in Rape Case Based on False Promise of Marriage and Coercion. Consent Obtained Under Misconception of Fact or Fear of Defamation is Vitiated and Constitutes Rape Under Section 375 IPC.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeal in Injunction Suit Involving Lis Pendens Transfer. Transfer of Suit Property During Pendency of Appeal Attracts Doctrine of Lis Pendens Under Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882.