CHAMAN LAL Vs. NANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN terms of the orders passed in this petition on 21.10.2014, a debatable question that in a situation where the JD was ex parte in the main suit and sold the suit property during the pendency of the suit to a third person, the Sub -Registrar can be directed to register the sale deed in the name of DH during execution proceedings or not, arises for determination. Learned counsel representing the decree holder -plaintiff has placed reliance on the judgment of the apex Court in Usha Sinha versus Dina Ram & Others, (2008) 7 SCC, 144, and also that of Kerala High Court in K.S. Khader versus Rajamma John Madathil & others, AIR 1994 Kerala 122, and urged that sale of the suit property by the JD to third person i.e. S/Shri Raj Kumar and Ravinder Singh during the pendency of the suit being hit by principle of lis pendens do not create any right, title or interest in their favour nor they can resist, obstruct or object the execution of the decree sought to be executed. A reference in this behalf can be made to the legal principles settled by the apex Court in Usha Sinah's case supra, which reads as follows: - -

(2.) IT is seen that the facts in the case before the apex Court were identical in nature as in the present one before this Court. The vendor i.e. defendant -JD was duly served with the notice issued by this Court not only in the suit, but also in these proceedings. She however, opted for not putting appearance and rather allowed herself to be proceeded against ex parte. Therefore, it cannot be said that she had no knowledge about the pendency of the suit or the present proceedings.

(3.) IN view of the principles laid down in the judgments cited supra, Sub -Registrar (Rural), Shimla, is directed to register the sale deed of the suit property in the name of plaintiff -DH, uninfluenced by the revenue entries of the suit land in the name of subsequent purchaser S/Shri Raj Kumar and Ravinder Singh, in accordance with law, within six weeks from the production of a copy of this order before him by Mr. Dheeraj K. Vashista, Advocate, the Commissioner already appointed.