DHANNA SINGH AND ORS. versus BALJINDER KAUR AND ORS.

DHANNA SINGH AND ORS. versus BALJINDER KAUR AND ORS.

A subsequent purchaser impleaded as defendant cannot lead evidence when the original defendant has given up the right to lead evidence; he steps into the shoes of the first defendant, and is bound by decisions and procedural posture at the time of impleadment, especially under Section 52 T.P. Act (lis pendens).

Parties
Appellant: Dhanna Singh and Ors.; Respondent: Baltinder Kaur and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 April 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Permanent Injunction, Lis Pendens, Evidence in Civil Proceedings, Impleadment of Subsequent Purchaser
Civil Procedure Property Law Permanent Injunction Lis Pendens Evidence in Civil Proceedings Impleadment of Subsequent Purchaser

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dhanna Singh and Ors.

Appellant

Baltinder Kaur and Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appellate Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a subsequent purchaser (impleaded as defendant) can be permitted to lead evidence when the original defendant has given up that right
  2. 2 Effect of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act (lis pendens) on the rights of subsequent purchaser
  3. 3 Relief of permanent injunction against alienation and transfer of possession

Ratio Decidendi

A subsequent purchaser impleaded as defendant cannot lead evidence when the original defendant has given up the right to lead evidence; he steps into the shoes of the first defendant, and is bound by decisions and procedural posture at the time of impleadment, especially under Section 52 T.P. Act (lis pendens).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed. No costs.