SHINGARA SINGH versus DALJIT SINGH & ANR
The agreement to sell was proved and the sale deed to defendant no.2 was executed on 08.01.1993 during the pendency of the suit filed on 24.12.1992; therefore Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act (doctrine of lis pendens) applies, rendering the subsequent sale ineffective and justifying the High Court's decree for specific performance.
- Parties
- Appellant / Defendant No.2: Shingara Singh; Respondent / Plaintiff: Daljit Singh; Defendant No.1: Janraj Singh
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 14 October 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Section 52 Lis Pendens, Specific Performance, Agreement to Sell, Sale Deed, Bona Fide Purchaser, Fraud and Collusion, Cross Appeal, Pendency of Suit
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Shingara Singh
Appellant / Defendant No.2
Daljit Singh
Respondent / Plaintiff
Janraj Singh
Defendant No.1
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Applicability of doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act to a sale executed during the pendency of the suit
- 2 Whether defendant no.2 is a bona fide purchaser entitled to protection
- 3 Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside concurrent findings of the Trial Court and First Appellate Court and decreeing specific performance
Ratio Decidendi
The agreement to sell was proved and the sale deed to defendant no.2 was executed on 08.01.1993 during the pendency of the suit filed on 24.12.1992; therefore Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act (doctrine of lis pendens) applies, rendering the subsequent sale ineffective and justifying the High Court's decree for specific performance.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Judgment and decree of the High Court dated 06.04.2018 in RSA No. 4466 of 2010 affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment