Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.92 seconds)
Kumari Lata D/O Shivaji Rao Pol vs Sri. Shivaji Rao S/O Girijappa Pol & Ors on 23 June, 2017 cites

Thomson Press (India) Ltd vs Nanak Builders & Investrs.P.Ltd & Ors on 21 February, 2013

In this regard, reference could be made to Thomson Press (India) Limited vs. Nanak Builders and Investors Private Limited and others reported in (2013) 5 SCC 397. Although that case touched upon Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act and with regard to the purchase of the property which is the subject of a suit for specific performance during the pendency of the suit, nevertheless in that case it is held that when the subject matter of a suit for specific performance is transferred during the pendency of the litigation, in that event, under Order XXII Rule 10 of CPC a trasferee of the suit property could be impleaded as a party to the proceeding and be heard before any order is made. This is because a transferee pendente lite would claim an interest in the subject matter of the suit under the vendor who would be a defendant in a suit for specific performance.
Supreme Court of India Cites 30 - Cited by 385 - M Y Eqbal - Full Document

Nagubai Ammal & Others vs B. Shama Rao & Others on 26 April, 1956

made to Section 19 (c) of the Act wherein it has been categorically stated that specific performance of contract may be enforced against either party thereto or any other person claiming under him by a title arising subsequently to the contract, except a transferee for value who has paid his money in good faith and without notice of the original contract. This is because a transfer pendente lite is not illegal but would remain subservient to the pending litigation as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nagubai Ammal vs. B. Shama Rao reported in AIR 1956 SC 593 and several such decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the case of a transferee pendente lite he would be in a similar position as a heir or a legatee of a party who dies during the pendency of the suit or a proceeding and therefore could seek impleadment under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC. Particularly, if he is a bonafide purchaser for valuable consideration, he would have to be heard before passing
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 565 - S J Imam - Full Document
1