A single-judge oral order dismissing a revision petition against an order rejecting the petitioner's claim of bona fide purchase status, upholding the application of the doctrine of lis pendens as absolute.
No relief granted; the revision petition is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C.R.No.2915 of 2009 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
C.R.No.2915 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 02.07.2009
Om Parkash
...Petitioner
Versus
Sube Ram etc.
...Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA
Present: Mr. Gautam Dutt, Advocate, for the petitioner.
HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
C.M.No.14937-CII of 2009
The application is allowed and Annexures P-5 to P-7 are taken on record.
C.R.No.2915 of 2009
Challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the learned District Judge, Faridabad, on 20.11.2008 whereby the appeal against the order passed by the Executive Court on 27.9.2007 was dismissed.
A decree for specific performance of an agreement dated 28.4.1997 was passed by the Civil Court on 21.2.2002 in favour of Sube Ram and against Ishwar Singh. The plaintiff was granted one month time to deposit the balance amount. The application was filed by decreeholder for extension of time for depositing balance of Rs.38,000/-. The said application was allowed. The amount deposited by the decree-holder was withdrawn by the judgment debtor as well.
C.R.No.2915 of 2009 (O&M)
2
The petitioner has purchased the land from judgment debtor Ishwar Singh vide sale deed dated 17.5.2005. The objection filed by the petitioner are that having purchased land from Ishwar Singh, he is a bona fide purchaser and the sale effected by Ishwar Singh cannot be interferred with in execution of the decree passed by the learned trial Court.
Both the Courts below are found that the petitioner has purchased the property during the pendency of the execution petition and, thus, such sale is subject to doctrine of lis-pendens. The doctrine of lispendens is absolute and the petitioner cannot be permitted to raise the plea of bona fide purchaser, since the sale was during the pendency of the execution petition.
In view thereof, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order, which may warrant interference by this Court in the present revision petition.
Dismissed.
02.07.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a court in revision can interfere when lower courts correctly applied the doctrine of lis pendens to a sale during pendency of execution.
Whether a bona fide purchaser can claim protection against execution of a decree passed during the pendency of the suit.
Om Parkash
Sube Ram
Hemant Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
