Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act embodies the doctrine of lis pendens, which is based on the Latin maxim lis pendens nihil innovature—“Nothing new should be introduced during the pendency of litigation.” This doctrine prohibits the transfer of property involved in litigation until the legal dispute is resolved, ensuring that the rights of the parties in the suit remain undisturbed. The purpose of this rule is to prevent interference with the court’s ability to adjudicate fairly and to uphold the finality of judicial decisions. As a principle of equity, justice, and good conscience, this rule applies even where the TPA does not apply.
Essentials of Section 52:
Section 52 has specific requirements for its application, ensuring that it applies only in genuine cases of pending litigation over property. The essentials are:
- Pendency of a suit or proceeding: There must be an active lawsuit or proceeding.
- Specific immovable property: The suit must be relating to a right in a specific immovable property.
- Competent court: The case must be in a court that has the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.
- Direct involvement of immovable property: The property in question must be directly involved in the dispute.
- Effect on rights and interests: The outcome of the case must affect the rights or interests of the other party.
- Transfer by a party to the suit: The property must be transferred or otherwise dealt with by one of the parties to the litigation.
- Non-collusive proceedings: The suit must not be collusive; in other words, it must be a genuine dispute rather than one where the parties are cooperating to influence the outcome.
Once these conditions are met, any transferee of the property becomes bound by the court’s eventual decision, bearing a significant legal obligation to respect the rights as adjudicated.
Object of the Doctrine of lis pendens
The doctrine of lis pendens is rooted in necessity and public policy. In Bellamy v. Sabine, the court explained that this principle is fundamental to both law and equity. Without it, a lawsuit over property could be rendered ineffective if one party could transfer the disputed property to a third party, frustrating the judicial process. Indian courts have upheld this reasoning; for instance, in Manik Roy v. Sanjay Verma, the court emphasised that lis pendens is not based on notice but on the need for judicial efficacy and the integrity of the legal process.
In Govinda Pillai v. Aiyyapan, the court stressed that without this principle all suits for specific property might be rendered abortive by successive alienations of the property in suit so that at the end of it another suit would have to be commenced and after that another making it almost impractical for a man ever to make his rights available by a resort to the courts of justice.
Rights of the Transferee
Under Section 52, if a party to a suit transfers the disputed property, the transferee’s rights are subject to the outcome of the litigation. While the transfer is not annulled, the transferee’s title remains subordinate to the court’s decision. This principle was clarified in Thomson Press v. Nanak Builders, where the court held that Section 52 does not prevent the transfer but makes it subject to the rights of the parties as determined in the final judgment.
Example 1: If a person transfers a piece of land while it is the subject of a lawsuit over ownership, the transferee acquires title but takes it at their own risk. If the court later decides against the transferor’s ownership, the transferee’s title may be affected by that judgment.
Example 2: A is the owner of a house and permits B to stay in it. B starts treating the property as if it belongs to him and refuses to allow A to enter the premises. A files a suit against B for recovering the possession and declaration of title. Soon after the institution of suit B sells the property to C. A fails to implicate C as a party. The suit is decided in favour of A but due to the application of Section 52 it is binding on not only B but on C as well, as the transfer of property at the instance of B was during the pendency of this litigation. A would not have to file a fresh suit against C as the decision of the court would be enforceable as against C also.
Need of Section 52
Section 52 protects the right of the suitor to any immovable property which is subject matter of issue in the court. It informs and alerts about the creation of a third party’s interest in the said property, which has the effect of defeating the right of a person in whose favour decree or order is passed by the court of competent jurisdiction.
This principle is based on the view that the person purchasing the property from the judgment debtor during the pendency of the suit has no independent right to property to resist, obstruct or object the execution of a decree.
Conclusion
The doctrine of lis pendens is a crucial legal principle aimed at preserving the integrity of the judicial process. By prohibiting the transfer of property under litigation, Section 52 prevents parties from bypassing the court’s authority and ensures that legal disputes are resolved in a fair and orderly manner. This doctrine upholds judicial finality and deters any attempt to undermine the pending litigation through subsequent transfers.
Explore Law Shore: law notes today and take the first step toward mastering the fundamentals of law with ease.
