Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5.5) Pursuant to the said order, the petitioners have registered the lis pendence about the suit land before the Sub-Registrar, Surat-8 (Rander) on 13/09/2013and the same is registered as SRT/8/RDR No. 956/2013. Such registration of lis pendence was duly entered in the revenue record vide Entry No. 10877 by the revenue authority with regard to the suit land.

5.7) The petitioners therefore, filed Misc. Civil Application No. 2213/2015 before this Court seeking modification/clarification of the order dated 29th August, 2013 passed in Civil Application No.5654/2013 in First Appeal No. 1274/2013 to the effect that necessary entry in the revenue record be entered with regard to the lis pendence registered by the petitioners. However, such application came to be withdrawn by the petitioners vide order dated 28th August, 2015 wherein the Division Bench observed that if the revenue entry is not entered based on lis pendence, it would be open for the petitioners to resort to appropriate proceedings under the Code or substantial petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and such aspect cannot be examined in the proceedings of the First Appeal.

6.1) It was submitted that pursuant to the order passed by this Court in Civil Application No. 5654/2013 in First Appeal No. 1274/2013 on 29th August, 2013, the petitioners have executed the document of lis pendence on 13th September, 2013 with the office of Sub-Registrar at Surat-8 (Rander).

6.2) It was pointed out that on the basis of the registered document of lis pendence Entry No. 10877 was mutated in Village Form no. 6 on 18th October, 2014. However, the Mamlatdar by the impugned order dated 27th April, 2015 rejected the Entry No. 10877 holding that the High Court has passed the order only for registration of lis pendence and no entry can be made in the revenue record for recording the second right on the basis of such lis pendence. It was submitted that the Mamlatdar ought to have corrected the entry restricting to the registration of lis pendence only instead of rejecting the entry.

6.3) In support of her submissions, learned advocate Ms. Pahwa relied upon the decision of this Court in case of Dipakbhai Manilal Patel v. State of Gujarat through Secretary reported in 2007 (2) GLR 1297 to submit that the principles of lis pendence would apply to a C/SCA/15248/2015 JUDGMENT DATED: 12/01/2022 transaction if entered after institution of the suit as per the provisions of section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and therefore, the Mamlatdar could not have rejected the Entry No. 10877 in view of the registered document of lis pendence.