When purchaser pendente lite can be added as party to suit

Thomson Press (India) Ltd. v. Nanak Builders & Investors (P) Ltd., (2013) 5 SCC 397
Contract and Specific Relief
Specific Relief Act, 1963
S. 19 - Transferee/Purchaser pendente lite, held, may be impleaded in pending suit for specific performance of prior
agreement to sell/contract for sale (CFS) filed by buyer under said CFS against original owner/transferor/seller pendente
lite - Discretion of court to enlarge array of defendants - Defences that can be raised by such added party-defendant -
Lis pendens/S. 52 TPA issues - In instant case, despite having notice and knowledge of injunction by court passed in
such pending suit, prohibiting transactions or alienation of suit property, suit property purchased by appellant -

Thereafter, in said suit filed by R-1 (plaintiff) buyer under prior CFS against R-2 (original owner/vendor), for specific
performance of said prior CFS, appellant filed application for impleadment - High Court rejecting said application on
ground that appellant purchased suit property from R-2 knowing fully well that there was injunction by court prohibiting
any transactions of said property till disposal of suit - Sustainability - Held, transfer pendente lite is neither illegal nor void
ab initio but remains subservient to rights eventually determined by court in pending litigation - Hence, transfer in favour
of purchaser pendente lite is effective in transferring title subject to certain obligations as decision of court in a suit is
binding not only on litigating parties but also on those who derive title pendente lite - Equity's darling and decree
enforcement issues - Appellant purchased entire property that formed subject-matter of R-1's suit during pendency of
said suit which was neither bona fide nor without notice of prior CFS - Hence, appellant-transferee pendente lite, held, is
not protected under S. 19 of Specific Relief Act against specific performance of prior CFS - Also, if purchaser pendente
lite is not made party to pending suit, there may be a situation where transferor pendente lite may not defend title
properly as he has no interest remaining, or may collude with plaintiff in which case interest of purchaser pendente lite
will be ignored - Also, purchaser pendente lite may be impleaded in such suit, as decree for specific performance of prior
CFS can only be enforced against him as he now holds the title/interest which is the subject-matter of the prior CFS and
original owner does not hold it any more - CPC impleadment powers - Court can invoke enabling provision of Or. 22 R.
10 CPC to add appellant-transferee pendente lite as party-defendant - Also, court is empowered to add any person as
party at any stage of the proceedings if such person's presence is necessary for effective adjudication of issues involved
in the suit - Hence held, appellant may be impleaded in R-1's suit for specific performance of prior CFS - However, such
person as appellant is permitted to take only such defences that are available to original owner/vendor i.e. the person
from whom transferee pendente lite derives title/interest, 
Contract and Specific Relief
Specific Relief Act, 1963
S. 19(b) - Specific performance of prior agreement to sell/contract for sale (CFS) against purchaser pendente lite -
When available to buyer under prior CFS - Explained - Held, sale of immovable property is immune from specific
performance of prior CFS only if transferee has acquired title for valuable consideration, in good faith and without notice
of prior CFS - In instant case, appellant-transferee pendente lite, held, is not protected against specific performance of
prior CFS at behest of R-1 plaintiff buyer thereunder as transfer in favour of appellant though for valuable consideration,
was not in good faith nor was it without notice of said prior CFS, 
Property Law
Transfer of Property Act, 1882
S. 3, S. 40 Paras 2 & 3 and S. 54 - Notice - Modes of fastening - Advertisement in newspaper of right under prior
agreement to sell/contract for sale 
Transfer of Property Act, 1882
S. 52 - Doctrine of lis pendens - What is - Transfer pendente lite - Validity of, and effect of S. 52 - Doctrine of lis
pendens is based on ground that it is necessary for administration of justice that decision of a court in a suit should be
binding not only on litigating parties but on those who derive title pendente lite - S. 52 however does not annul pendente
lite conveyance or transfer or make it void but renders it subservient to rights of parties to a litigation as may be
eventually determined by court - Thus, transfer made in favour of subsequent purchaser is subject to riders and restraint
orders passed by court, if any, (2013) 5 SCC 397-D

Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Ss. 52 and 54 - Transfer/Sale pendente lite in disregard of injunction/restraint order of court - Effect - Held, party
committing such breach may incur liability to be punished therefor, but sale by itself may remain valid between parties
thereto subject to any directions which competent court may issue in suit against vendor, (2013) 5 SCC 397-E
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Or. 22 R. 10 and Or. 1 R. 10 - Relative scope - Assignment, creation or devolution of interest during pendency of suit -
Effect - Impleadment/Addition of party - Held, Or. 22 R. 10 is an enabling provision - Hence, independent of Or. 1 R. 10,
court can add transferee pendente lite as party-defendant even if application for impleadment is made only under Or. 1
R. 10, (2013) 5 SCC 397-F
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Or. 1 R. 9 and Or. 22 R. 10 - Transferee pendente lite, when to be made necessary party - Explained, (2013) 5 SCC
397-G
Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Or. 1 R. 10(2) - Power of court to implead any person - Principles reiterated, 

Print Page