Siddamsetty Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs Katta Sujatha Reddy 2024 INSC 861 - SC Rules - Review - S 52 TP Act - Lis Pendens - Contract Law - Specific Performance

Case Details

Case name: Siddamsetty Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs Katta Sujatha Reddy
Coram: CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra
Citation: 2024 INSC 861

Transfer of Property Act 1882 - Section 52 -The following conditions ought to be fulfilled for the doctrine of lis pendens to apply: a. There must be a pending suit or proceeding; b. The suit or proceeding must be pending in a competent court; c. The suit or proceeding must not be collusive9 ; d. The right to immovable property must be directly and specifically in question in the suit or proceeding; e. The property must be transferred by a party to the litigation; and f. The alienation must affect the rights of any other party to the dispute the doctrine of lis pendens that Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act encapsulates, bars the transfer of a suit property during the pendency of litigation. The only exception to the principle is when it is transferred under the authority of the court and on terms imposed by it. Where one of the parties to the suit transfers the suit property (or a part of it) to a third-party, the latter is bound by the result of the proceedings even if he did not have notice of the suit or proceeding- The doctrine of lis pendens kicks in at the stage of “institution” and not at the stage when notice is issued by this Court. (Para 46-49)

Supreme Court Rules 2013 - Order XLVII - Code of Civil Procedure 1908 - Order XLVII Rule 1- Principles on the exercise of review jurisdiction : a. Review proceedings are not by way of appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 CPC; b. Error on the face of record must be an error which must strike one on a mere perusal and must not on a long drawn process; c. The power of review must not be exercised on the ground that the decision was erroneous on merits; d. The phrase “any other sufficient reason” means a reason that is analogous to the grounds specified in Order 47 Rule 1 CPC; and e. The mere possibility of two views on the subject cannot be a ground for review. (para 18-19)