2010 (10) TMI 1215 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of the doctrine of lis pendens.
2. Bona fide purchaser status of respondent Nos. 2 to 6.
3. Completion of sale upon registration.

Summary:

1. Applicability of the Doctrine of Lis Pendens:
The primary issue was whether the sale deed executed by respondent No. 1 in favor of respondent Nos. 2 to 6 could be subject to the doctrine of lis pendens. The courts below presumed that the registration of a document relates back to the date of execution, and thus, the doctrine of lis pendens would not apply. However, the Supreme Court held that despite the registration relating back to the date of execution, the sale could not be deemed complete until its registration. Therefore, the doctrine of lis pendens was applicable as the registration occurred after the suit was filed.

2. Bona Fide Purchaser Status of Respondent Nos. 2 to 6:
The appellant argued that respondent Nos. 2 to 6 could not be considered bona fide purchasers for value without notice of the original contract, as they were aware that the land was in possession of the appellant since 1970. The Supreme Court agreed, noting that the sale deed in favor of respondent Nos. 2 to 6 mentioned the appellant's possession. Thus, respondent Nos. 2 to 6 were not bona fide purchasers and could not claim the benefit of Section 19(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

3. Completion of Sale Upon Registration:
The Court emphasized that u/s 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908, a sale of immovable property valued over Rs. 100 requires registration to be complete. The Court cited precedents, including Ram Saran Lall v. Mst. Domini Kuer, to assert that a sale is not complete until registration, even if the registration relates back to the date of execution. Therefore, the sale in favor of respondent Nos. 2 to 6 was not complete until its registration on 3.9.1971, which was after the suit was filed.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the sale executed by respondent No. 1 in favor of respondent Nos. 2 to 6 on 2.8.1971 was not complete until its registration on 3.9.1971. As the sale was completed during the pendency of the suit, the doctrine of lis pendens applied. The respondents were aware of the appellant's possession, negating their status as bona fide purchasers. The appeals were allowed, and the respondents were directed to execute the sale deed in favor of the appellant. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 were entitled to receive the consideration amount paid to respondent No. 1 with 10% interest per annum.