(1.) On this appeal, by the plaintiffs against the concurrent decisions of the courts below dismissing their suit, the only question presented for determination in support of the appeal is : Whether the purchase of the lands in dispute by defendants second party in a rent execution is hit by the doctrine of lis pendens because of a title suit in respect of these very lands brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants second party which was then pending, but was subsequently decreed.
(2.) This question of lis pendens was not raised in any of the courts below, but as it was a pure question of law, Mr. A. B. N. Sinha, who appeared for the appellants, Was permitted to raise it at the second appellate stage in this Court, as it did not require investigation, of any question of fact, and, as it arose on the facts as found by the courts below. This case is a very clear and simple one when once the various proceedings and dates are ascertained.
(3.) In order to appreciate this point, however, it is necessary to know a few facts bearing on this question: