Alienation of Suit property is not illegal merely because it was done during pendency of suit: Supreme Court
The bench in the case of “Madhukar Nivrutti Jagtap & ors. vs Smt. Pramilabai Chandulal Parandekar & ors” (Civil Appeal No. 5382 of 2007) decided on 13.08.2019 reiterated that the effect of doctrine of lis pendens is not to annul all the transfers effected by the parties to a suit but only to render them subservient to the rights of the parties under the decree or order which may be made in that suit.
Challenge:
Whether the transfer made during the pendency of suit to third parties is illegal?
The High Court held that the during the pendency of the suit of specific performance the defendants were estopped from transferring the suit land in view of Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and therefore sale deed in favour of other defendants are required to be held as illegal.
Held:
Referring to Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act, the bench observed that any transaction on being hit by Section 52 ibid., is illegal or void ab initio, as assumed by the High Court. In Sarvinder Singh v. Dalip Singh and Ors.: (1996) 5 SCC 539, as relied upon by the High Court, the subsequent purchasers sought to come on record as defendants and in that context, this Court referred to Section 52 of the T.P. Act and pointed out that alienation in their favour would be hit by the doctrine of lis pendens. The said decision is not an authority on the point that every alienation during the pendency of the suit is to be declared illegal or void. The effect of doctrine of lis pendens is not to annul all the transfers effected by the parties to a suit but only to render them subservient to the rights of the parties under the decree or order which may be made in that suit. In other words, its effect is only to make the decree passed in the suit binding on the transferee, i.e., the subsequent purchaser. Nevertheless, the transfer remains valid subject, of course, to the result of the suit.