In a recent decision, Justice Madhav J. Jamdar of the Bombay High Court offered an unusual but transparent explanation for a five-month delay in uploading a judgment pronounced on December 19, 2024. The delay, he explained, resulted from an overwhelming workload, including extended court hours, late-night order finalisations, and work on weekends and holidays.
The judgment pertained to appeals in a 1986 suit for specific performance of an agreement dated December 24, 1984. The Trial Court had decreed specific performance on November 30, 1990, directing the execution of a sale deed and delivery of possession. However, during the pendency of the suit, the defendant had executed eight sale deeds in favour of third parties, who later opposed execution.
The High Court rejected the appellants’ arguments that they had acquired an independent title through registered deeds and that the 1990 decree could not bind them without being made parties. They also argued that the absence of Rule 102 in the Bombay Amendment to the CPC allowed them to resist execution.
Justice Jamdar held that the transfer deeds were hit by the doctrine of lis pendens under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, as a lis pendens notice had been registered before the sale deeds were executed. The Court clarified that once a transfer is declared pendente lite, all statutory consequences under Section 52 must follow.
Rejecting the argument that the decree was a nullity, the Court cited Supreme Court precedent to emphasise that such objections would render judicial proceedings meaningless. It affirmed that the 1990 decree, having been passed by a competent court in a properly instituted suit, remained enforceable.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the appeals and held that the purchasers pendente lite could not obstruct the execution proceedings. The interim relief granted earlier was directed to continue for three months from the date of uploading of the judgment.
Case Title: Alka Shrirang Chavan & Anr. Vs. Hemchandra Rajaram Bhonsale & Ors.
Case No: Second Appeal No.396 Of 2022
Coram: Justice Madhav J Jamdar
Picture Source :
