Introduction

• Lis pendens is a Latin word that means “pending litigation”.
  • It is based on a legal maxim “pendente lite nihil innoveture” which means nothing new should be introduced during pendency of a litigation.
• The doctrine of lis pendens is enshrined under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TOPA), in India.
  • This section deals with the effect of transfer of property pending a suit or proceeding.
• It is based on equity and public policy.

What is the Legal Framework of Section 52 of TOPA?

Transfer of property pending suit relating thereto —

During the pendency in any Court having authority within the limits of India or established beyond such limits by the Central Government, any suit or proceedings which is not collusive and in which any right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein, except under the authority of the Court and on such terms as it may impose.

For the purposes of this section, the pendency of a suit or proceeding shall be deemed to commence from the date of the presentation of the plaint or the institution of the proceeding in a Court of competent jurisdiction, and to continue until the suit or proceeding has been disposed of by a final decree or order and complete satisfaction or discharge of such decree or order has been obtained, or has become unobtainable by reason of the expiration of any period of limitation prescribed for the execution thereof by any law for the time being in force.

What are the Essentials of Lis Pendens?

• The suit or proceeding must be pending.
• Suit must not be collusive.
• Right related to immovable property must be contended.
• The right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question.

What is the Purpose of Lis Pendens?

• The underlying principle behind the doctrine of lis pendens is to protect the rights of parties involved in a legal action and prevent parties from transferring the subject matter of a dispute during the pendency of a suit in a way that might frustrate the final outcome of the litigation.
• The doctrine is based on the idea that a third party acquiring an interest in the property during the pendency of a suit should be bound by the outcome of that suit.

What is Concept Void Transfer under Lis Pendens?

• When a suit or proceeding is pending in any court and an immovable property is the subject matter of that suit or proceeding, any transfer of that property by any party to the suit or proceeding is void against any person acquiring an interest in the property under the decree or order resulting from that suit or proceeding.
• The transfer referred to in the section is void as against a subsequent transferee from the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding.
• This means that if a person transfers an immovable property while a suit is pending, and another person acquires an interest in the property as a result of the court's decision in that suit, the transfer made during the pendency of the suit will be considered void.

What are the Exceptions of Lis Pendens?

• The section does not affect the enforcement of a judgment or decree or order in a suit or proceeding in which such transfer is not contested.
• The doctrine does not apply to suit where property is unidentifiable.
• The doctrine does not apply to collusive suits.

What are the Landmark Cases of Doctrine of Lis Pendens?

• Bellamy v. Sabine (1857):
  • This doctrine was originated in this case where Justice Turner observed that “This is a doctrine common to law and equity courts, which I apprehend, on the grounds that, if alienation pendente lite was allowed to prevail, it would simply not be possible for any action or suit to be resolved successfully. In any case, the plaintiff will be responsible for the defendant who alienated the property before the judgment or the decree and must be obliged, according to the same course of action, to initiate these proceedings de novo”.
• Rajendra Singh and Ors. v. Santa Singh and Ors (1973):
  • The Supreme Court cited that “Lis pendens literally means a pending suit, and the doctrine of lis pendens has been defined as the jurisdiction, power, or control which a court acquires over property involved in a suit pending the continuance of the action, and until final judgment therein”.
• Vinod Seth v. Devinder Bajaj and Ors. (2010):
  • The suit property was exempted by SC from application of doctrine of lis pendens on furnishing security of Rs. 3,00,000.