lis pendens doctrine

murali mohan c (Querist) 28 August 2015 This query is : Resolved
Dear sir my fathers sister lost a partation suit on 24-03-2014 later on 01-08-2014 challenged it in additional court while the suit was pending my father got release deed from me on 13-10-2014 and i challenged on grounds of undueinfluence to cancel anf for partation .. Will my deed cancel on list pendens doctrine ..where an appeal was pending in court the deed eas executed..

Follow Query

Report Abuse

SAINATH DEVALLA (Expert) 28 August 2015
Lis Pendens' generally means "pendency of a suit in a Court".
It embodies the principle that the subject matter of the suit should not be transferred to third party during the pendency of the suit. The transferee is bound by the result of the suit in a case when such such property is transferred during the pendency of the suit.
The doctrine is contained in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act.Sale is invalid.

In a recent decision, Har Narain v. Mam Chand (Civil Appeal Np. 995-996/2003, judgment dated October 8, 2010), the Supreme Court has discussed and reviewed the law relating to the doctrine of lis pendens. The essential facts were that the first respondent was the owner of certain property (land) which he mortgaged to the appellant. Subsequently, the first respondent executed a sale deed purporting to transfer the property to certain bona fide purchasers for consideration. After the execution of the sale deed but before the registration of the same, the appellant filed a suit seeking to restrain the first respondent from alienating the property. In other words, the sequence of events was such, that on the date of filing of the suit, a sale deed had been executed but had not been registered. The registration was completed subsequently. The case of the appellant was that as the registration was subsequent to the filing of the suit, the sale was affected by lis pendens.

The doctrine of lis pendens, embodied in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, effectively provides that during the pendency of a suit in which any right to immovable property in is question, the property cannot be transferred by any party to the suit so as to affect the rights of other parties. The contention of the appellant was that the transfer took place on the date of registration (the document being compulsorily registrable); and accordingly, the doctrine of lis pendens applied. The trial court found that although registration was subsequent to the filing of the suit, the execution of the sale deed was prior to filing; and accordingly, the doctrine of lis pendens would not be applicable. It found that under Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908, registration dates back to the date of execution. Accordingly, the trial court found that the sale in favour of bona fide purchasers for consideration would be protected; as after the registration, the same would be deemed to have been effected on the date of the execution of the sale deed itself. The judgment of the trail court was affirmed on first appeal, and also on second appeal. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, and held that the doctrine of relating back had no application in the facts of the case. Accordingly, the transfer was hit by lis Pendens. The Court observed:

“A similar issue though in a case of right of pre-emption was considered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Ram Saran Lall & Ors. v. Mst. Domini Kuer & Ors., AIR 1961 SC 1747, by the majority of 3:2, the Court came to the conclusion that as the mere execution of the sale deed could not make the same effective and registration thereof was necessary, it was of no consequence unless the registration was made. Thus, in spite of the fact that the Act, 1908, could relate back to the date of execution in view of provisions of Section 47 of the [Registration] Act, 1908, the sale could not be given effect to prior to registration. However, as the sale was not complete until the registration of instrument of sale is complete, it was not completed prior to the date of its registration.

murali mohan c (Querist) 28 August 2015
Sir wat constitutes undueinfluence .. Am daughter my dad mom snd brother took release deed of ancestral property without consideration..the release deed is registered on 13-10-2014 i signed because they pose threat to me on 19-10-2014 my marriage was their so i signed which i dont like .. Later as soon i went to my husband i lodged private complaint and partation suit and release deed null and void on grounds of undueinfluence .. Please provide any undueinfluence cases