1990 (11) TMI 414 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of sale deed executed prior to attachment before judgment but registered subsequently.
2. Interpretation of Order 38 Rule 5 and Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
3. Application of Section 64 of the CPC.
4. Effect of Section 47 of the Registration Act on the sale deed.
5. Relevance of Section 49 of the Registration Act.
6. Impact of subsequent court sale on the rights of the vendee.

Summary:

1. Validity of Sale Deed Executed Prior to Attachment Before Judgment but Registered Subsequently:
The core issue was whether Hamda Ammal, who purchased the property via a sale deed executed on 9.9.1970 but registered on 26.10.1970, had a superior claim over Avadiappa, who obtained an attachment before judgment on 17.9.1970. The Court held that the sale deed executed before the attachment but registered later would prevail over the attachment before judgment.

2. Interpretation of Order 38 Rule 5 and Rule 10 of the CPC:
Order 38 Rule 5 CPC allows attachment before judgment if the defendant intends to obstruct or delay the execution of any decree. However, this provision does not apply if the sale deed was executed before the suit was filed. Order 38 Rule 10 CPC states that attachment before judgment shall not affect the rights existing prior to the attachment of persons not parties to the suit.

3. Application of Section 64 of the CPC:
Section 64 CPC prohibits private alienation of property after attachment. However, the Court clarified that this does not affect the registration of a sale deed executed before the attachment. The act of registration, which is a statutory requirement, does not constitute a transfer prohibited by Section 64.

4. Effect of Section 47 of the Registration Act on the Sale Deed:
Section 47 of the Registration Act stipulates that a registered document operates from the time it would have commenced if no registration was required. Thus, the rights of the vendee relate back to the date of execution of the sale deed, not the date of registration.

5. Relevance of Section 49 of the Registration Act:
Section 49 of the Registration Act, particularly its proviso, allows an unregistered document to be received as evidence for specific performance or part performance of a contract. This negates the argument that the execution of the sale deed confers no rights until registration.

6. Impact of Subsequent Court Sale on the Rights of the Vendee:
The Court rejected the argument that the subsequent court sale in favor of respondent No. 5, M.S.A. Kadar, could override the rights of Hamda Ammal. Once the sale deed was executed, the subsequent attachment or court sale could not confer any title to the attaching creditor.

Case References:
- The Court distinguished the present case from Ram Saran Lall v. Mst. Domini Kuer, which dealt with pre-emption under Mohammedan Law.
- The Court referred to Hiralal Agrawal v. Rampadarath Singh, noting that the question of re-conveyance was academic in that context.
- The Court endorsed the view in Vannarakkal Kallalathil Sreedharan v. Chandramaath Balakrishnan, which held that a sale deed executed before attachment but registered later prevails over the attachment.

Conclusion:
The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order was set aside, and the Subordinate Judge's decision decreeing the suit in favor of the plaintiff was confirmed. Each party was directed to bear their own costs.