Sections 41 and 52 of TP Act 1882 – Protection of Bona fide Purchaser and Doctrine of Lis Pendens
On 10.11.2002, the agreement to sell the land was executed between the appellant and the respondent no.1 on payment of Rs.2.50 lakhs and remaining Rs.5.50 lakhs to be paid at the time of execution of the sale deed on or before 10.11.2004.
However, before execution of the sale-deed, the appellant filed a suit for permanent injunction on 21.7.2003 on knowing that the respondent no.3 was likely to alienate the suit property. On 28.7.2003, an order of temporary injunction was passed in favour of the appellant.
On the same day of 28.7.2003, the respondent no.3 executed a release deed in favour of his son respondent no.4 for which mutation was also sanctioned.
Respondent No.4 executed sale-deed dated 16.6.2004 of the suit land in favour of respondent nos.1 and 2. Surprisingly, the lawyer of the appellant in the injunction suit was attesting witness to the said sale-deed.
Thereafter, the appellant filed suit for specific performance. Respondent Nos.l and 2 sought protection as bona fide purchasers for valuable consideration under Section 41 of the TP Act 1882.
The appeal of the respondent nos.1 and 2 was dismissed on 6.3.2012. It was held that respondent nos.1 and 2 would have been aware of the injunction and their defence of bona fide purchasers cannot be accepted.
However, the second appeal of the respondent nos.1 and 2 was allowed by the PH High Court.
HELD that the object underlying the doctrine of lis pendens is for maintaining status quo that cannot be affected by an act of any party in a pending litigation. The objective is also to prevent multiple proceedings by parties in different forums. The principle is based on equity and good conscience. In view of this even if the TP Act is not applicable to the State of Punjab, still the doctrine is applicable.
Explanation to Section 52 of TP Act clarifies that pendency of a suit shall be deemed to have commenced from the date on which the plaintiff presents the suit. Such pendency would extend till a final decree is passed and such decree is realised.
In this case, suit for injunction was filed on 21.7.2003 and the release deed was filed on 28.7.2003. Therefore, it is covered by the doctrine of lis pendens and would take its effect. Moreover, the subsequent sale-deed dated 16.6.2004 which was during operation of temporary injunction order cannot operate against the interests of the appellant. Therefore, the respondent nos.1 and 2 are not entitled to protection of Section 41 of TP Act as bona fide purchasers.
Judgment dated 3.5.2024 of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.2991 of 2024 of Chander Bhan (D) through LR Sher Sigh Vs. Mukhtiar Singh and others
