Even in suit for recovery of money, Principle of lis pendence is applicable - Lis commence from the date of presentation of plaint
Citation
Annakkili Versus Murugan & Others
Head Note
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Section 100 – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 52 & 53 - Second
appeal – Substantial question of law – Ground of fraudulent transaction
– Claim petition dismissed by courts below - Whether the Courts below
have committed manifest error in dismissing the claim petition insofar
as item No.1 is concerned as there was no attachment when the property
was sold by the second respondent in favour of appellant - Whether the
Courts below have erred in not giving a finding regarding the patent
collusion between the second respondent and the decree holder especially
when the second respondent had deposed on the side of the decree holder
before the Court below - Whether the Courts below have erred in
dismissing the claim petition on the ground of fraudulent transaction,
when admittedly there are no plurality of creditors to avail the ground
of fraudulent transaction under Section 53 of the Transfer of Property
Act
Court held, Defendant or Judgment Debtor cannot transfer the suit property from the date of initiation of proceeding for attachment before judgment in a pending money suit - Courts are not to perpetuate an illegality, rather it is the duty of the courts to rectify mistakes – Substantial questions of law against the appellant, dismisses the civil miscellaneous second appeal, confirming the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below.
[Paras 10 and 11]
Cases Referred:
Chellappa v. J.Jagadeesa Chettiar and others - CDJ 2007 MHC 011
Ammavasai v. Tulasikannu and another - CDJ 2017 MHC 4321
Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt.Ltd., & others v. Tosh Apartments Pvt.Ltd.,& Others - CDJ 2012 SC 560
Court held, Defendant or Judgment Debtor cannot transfer the suit property from the date of initiation of proceeding for attachment before judgment in a pending money suit - Courts are not to perpetuate an illegality, rather it is the duty of the courts to rectify mistakes – Substantial questions of law against the appellant, dismisses the civil miscellaneous second appeal, confirming the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below.
[Paras 10 and 11]
Cases Referred:
Chellappa v. J.Jagadeesa Chettiar and others - CDJ 2007 MHC 011
Ammavasai v. Tulasikannu and another - CDJ 2017 MHC 4321
Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt.Ltd., & others v. Tosh Apartments Pvt.Ltd.,& Others - CDJ 2012 SC 560
Comments
Post a Comment