Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (2.33 seconds)

Anand Nivas (Private) Ltd vs Anandji Kalyanji Pedhi & Ors on 5 September, 1963

27. It is required to be also noted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Anand Nivas Private Ltd. (supra) referred to and relied upon by learned counsel Mr. Shah, there is a discussion on this aspect in Para 39 with regard to Transfer of Property (Bombay Provision for Uniformity and Amendment) Act, 1959, wherein the applicability of the Act in order to maintain uniformity has been considered and it has been observed that notwithstanding the formation of the new State, the territorial extent of laws previously in operation would continue to apply for the purpose of uniformity.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 168 - A K Sarkar - Full Document

Sarvinder Singh vs Dalip Singh & Ors on 2 August, 1996

31. Similarly, the judgment in the case of Sarvinder Singh (supra), again referring to the aspect of lis pendens and alienation pending litigation whether it would be hit by the doctrine of lis pendens under sec. 52 of the T.P. Act was considered and the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed, which has been much emphasised by learned counsel Mr. Shah referring to sec. 52 of the T.P. Act that "the property could not have been transferred or dealt with in any way affecting the rights of the parties except with the order or authority of the Court." Admittedly, the order or authority has not been obtained for alienation of the property. Therefore, the moot question which is required to be considered is whether the transaction which has taken place would be hit by the doctrine of lis pendens or operation of sec. 52 of T.P. Act while considering the submissions made by the respondents about the bona fide purchaser having purchased without even knowledge about such litigation and admittedly when there is no such notice as required under the Registration Act having been published.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 153 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1   2 Next