Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispendensandregistrationofdocumentsNewslettersInternationalLawOffice
SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineof
lispendensandregistrationof
documents
December072010
Litigation, India
Facts
Decision
Comment
InHarNarainvMamChand,(1)theSupremeCourtdiscussedandreviewedthelawrelatingtothedoctrineoflis
pendenswithregardtoSection47(2)ofthe1908RegistrationAct.Thedoctrineoflispendensprovidesthatno
fixedpropertycanbetransferredwhileanactionrelatingtoitispendingbeforeacourtoflaw.(3)UnderSection
47,aregisteredsaledeedofafixedproperty,onregistration,isdeemedtooperatefromthedateofexecution.The
courtclarifiedthatthelegalfictioncreatedbyvirtueofSection47doesnotcircumventtheoperationoflis
pendens.Ineffect,thecourtheldthatifasaledeedwasnotregisteredatthetimethecivilsuitcommencedandis
registeredsubsequently,thepropertysalewillstillbesubjecttotheprincipleoflispendens.
Facts
Thefirstrespondent,ownerofcertainland,mortgagedthepropertyinfavourofitspredecessorininterestofthe
appellant,whichhadbeeninpossessionofthelandsince1970.Therespondentandtheappellanthadalso
enteredintoanagreementtoselltheproperty.Subsequently,therespondentexecutedasaledeedpurportingto
transferthepropertytoathirdpartyonAugust21971.ThesaledeedwasregisteredonSeptember31971.
IntheperiodbetweenexecutionofthesaledeedanditsregistrationonAugust101971,theappellantfiledsuit
againsttherespondentseekingspecificperformanceoftheagreementtosell.Thesuitwasresistedbythe
respondentonthegroundsthatthesaledeed(datedAugust2)relatedbacktothedateofexecutionunderSection
47,andaccordinglythepropertywasclassedassoldpriortoinitiationofthelawsuit.Theappellantarguedthat
sinceregistrationtookplaceafterfilingofthesuit,thesalewasaffectedbylispendens.
ThetrialcourtandtheHighCourtbothtooktheviewthatthedoctrineoflispendensdidnotapplytothefactsof
thiscase.Thelowercourtshadproceededonthepresumptionthatalthoughthedocumentshadbeenregistered
afterthesuitwasfiled,theyrelatedbacktothedateofexecution.Therefore,thesaleofthepropertywasdeemedto
havebeeneffectedonthedateoftheexecutionofthesaledeeditself.
http://www.internationallawoffice.com/Newsletters/Litigation/India/AmarchandMangaldasSureshAShroffCo/SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispenden
1/3
4/22/2016
SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispendensandregistrationofdocumentsNewslettersInternationalLawOffice
Decision
TheappellantappealedtotheSupremeCourt,whichupheldtheappeal.Itheldthat:
"inspiteofthefactthattheregistrationwouldrelatebacktothedateofexecution,thesalecannotbe
termedascompleteuntilitsregistrationanditbecomeseffectiveonlyonceitstandsregistered.Thus,the
fictioncreatedbySection47doesnotcomeintoplaybeforetheactualregistrationofthedocument."
TheSupremeCourtobservedthatasimilarissue,thoughinvolvingarightofpreemption,wasconsideredbythe
ConstitutionBenchinRamSaranLallvMstDominiKuer,(4)whereintheSupremeCourtconcludedthat:
"inspiteofthefactthattheAct,1908,couldrelatebacktothedateofexecutioninviewofprovisionsof
Section47oftheRegistrationAct,1908,thesalecouldnotbegiveneffecttopriortoregistrationand
thusthesalewasnotcompleteuntiltheregistrationofinstrumentofsale."
ThecourtinRamSaranalsoclarifiedthatSection47oftheRegistrationActdoesnotspecifywhenasaleis
deemedtobecomplete.Itobservedthat:
"asalewhichisadmittedlynotcompleteduntiltheregistrationoftheinstrumentofsaleiscompleted,
cannotbesaidtohavebeencompletedearlierbecausebyvirtueofSection47theinstrumentbywhichitis
effected,afterithasbeenregistered,commencestooperatefromanearlierdate."(5)
TheSupremeCourttooktheviewthatthelowercourtsfailedtoappreciatethatthefictioncreatedbySection47of
theactitselfisaconsequenceofregistrationofthedocument.Accordingly,itwasheldthatthedoctrineoflis
pendensappliedinthepresentcase,astheregistrationofthesaledeedoccurredafterthesuitwasfiled.
Comment
TheSupremeCourthasclarifieditspositionwithregardtotheoperationofSection47oftheRegistrationAct.It
appearsthat,initsreasoning,thecourthasequatedthewords"shalloperatefrom"to"beeffectivefrom".Onthat
reading,thepositiontakenbytheSupremeCourtisnotintunewiththeliteralmeaningofthewordsusedin
Section47.Thisisoneofthemanyinstancesinwhichthecourtshavechosentoeschewaliteralmeaninginfavour
ofapurposiveoneinordertoservetheendsofjustice.
ForfurtherinformationonthistopicpleasecontactJasleenKOberoiorBahaarDhawanatAmarchand&
Mangaldas&SureshAShroff&Cobytelephone(+911141590700),fax(+911126924900)oremail
(jasleen.oberoi@amarchand.comorbahaar.dhawan@amarchand.com).
Endnotes
(1)CivilAppeal995996/2003,October82010.
(2)Section47ofthe1908act:
http://www.internationallawoffice.com/Newsletters/Litigation/India/AmarchandMangaldasSureshAShroffCo/SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispenden
2/3
4/22/2016
SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispendensandregistrationofdocumentsNewslettersInternationalLawOffice
"Timefromwhichregistereddocumentoperates:Aregistereddocumentshalloperatefromthetime
whichitwouldhavecommencedtooperateifnoregistrationthereofhadbeenrequiredormade,andnot
fromthetimeofitsregistration."
(3)Thedoctrineoflispendens,embodiedinSection52ofthe1882TransferofPropertyAct,effectivelyprovides
thatduringthependencyofasuitinwhichanyrighttoimmovablepropertyinisquestion,thepropertycannotbe
transferredbyanypartytothesuitsoastoaffecttherightsofotherparties.
(4)AIR1961SC1747,byathreetotwomajority.
(5)Thispositionhasbeenfollowedinaplethoraofcases:HiralalAgrawalvRampadarathSinghAIR1969SC
244SKMohammadRafiqvKhalilulRehmadAIR1972SC2162ThakurKishanSinghvArvindKumarAIR1995
SC73andChandrikaSinghvArvindKumarSinghAIR2006SC2199.
The materials contained on this website are for general information purposes only and are subject to the
disclaimer.
ILO is a premium online legal update service for major companies and law rms worldwide. In-house
corporate counsel and other users of legal services, as well as law rm partners, qualify for a free
subscription.
JasleenKOberoi BahaarDhawan
http://www.internationallawoffice.com/Newsletters/Litigation/India/AmarchandMangaldasSureshAShroffCo/SupremeCourtrulesondoctrineoflispenden
3/3