Dr. HAZRAT BILAL vs ATHAR AHMAD ARBAB S — 2025 CLC 531 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Dr. HAZRAT BILAL VS ATHAR AHMAD ARBAB S. 8---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S. 52---Suit for possession through partition---Lis pendens, principle of---Applicability---Grant of temporary injunction---Petitioner filed application for registration of sale deed qua transfer of property during the pendency of suit and existence of status quo order, which was concurrently refused by the courts below---Validity---Petitioner/vendor was a contesting party before the trial court in the pending suit filed by the respondent and if he was allowed to alienate the property in question in favour of petitioner/vendee, then definitely it would adversely affect the interest and cause of respondent---Pendency of a suit in any court or proceeding, which was not collusive and in which any right to immovable property was directly and specifically in question, the property could not be transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other party thereto under the decree or order, which may be made therein---Findings of the courts below did not suffer from any illegality or irregularity---Civil revision was dismissed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2025 CLC 531 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Dr. HAZRAT BILAL VS ATHAR AHMAD ARBAB S. 52---Principle of lis pendens---Object and purpose---Section 52 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA) in legal parlance is known as principle of "lis pendens", which literally means a pending suit or cause---Doctrine of "lis pendens" has been defined as jurisdiction, power, or control which a court acquires over property involved in a suit pending the continuance of the action and until final judgment therein---Object and purpose of S.52 of TPA is to protect the parties to the litigation against alienation by them during the pendency of litigation---If the vendor is allowed to alienate the disputed property during the pendency of the suit, then, indeed, there would be no end to the pending litigation and certainly justice would be defeated, which is neither permissible nor desirable under the law---Section 52 of TPA is based upon the well-known maxim of equity "pendente lite nihil innovetur", which means that during the pendency of litigation nothing new should be introduced, which adversely affects the rights of the litigating parties.

Dr. HAZRAT BILAL vs ATHAR AHMAD ARBAB S — 2025 CLC 531 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC