{"id":249875,"date":"2021-06-16T19:26:26","date_gmt":"2021-06-16T13:56:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=249875"},"modified":"2022-04-11T11:22:20","modified_gmt":"2022-04-11T05:52:20","slug":"property-suit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: <\/strong>Dama Seshadri Naidu, J., in a suit for specific performance, observed that:<\/p>\n

\u201c..in a suit for specific performance, a third party\u2019s assertion that he has a stake in the subject matter of the suit counts to noting (sic). What matters is the contract, not the property covered by the contract. \u201c<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Background<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

\u2018A\u2019 engaged in a contract with B for purchasing some property and B defaulted. Later, C the brother of A, represented A as his power of attorney agent (POA) and after a few years, A discharged C from being his POA and pursued the case independently and got a decree \u2013 not for specific performance but for the return of money.<\/p>\n

Now an objection arose when A wanted to withdraw the deposited decretal amount and the objection was raised by C.<\/p>\n

The ground for objection was that C wanted a part of the decretal amount since he too had contributed to the sale consideration.<\/p>\n

Question for Consideration<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

Can C\u2019s claim be countenanced? Is such an \u2018intervention application\u2019 maintainable?<\/p>\n

Discussion<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

Code of Civil Procedure must be interpreted in a manner to subserve and advance the cause of justice.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

— C.K. Thakker\u2019 s Code of Civil Procedure, Vol. 1, EBC, p. 200 (EBC Reader)<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Bench noted that in the present matter, firstly, there was no lis<\/em> before the Court for it to entertain an interlocutory application. Thus, Court was proverbially functus officio.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Adding to the above, Court stated that C wanted the Court to revive and resurrect a disposed of suit and to do that the Court must set aside the decree that was already passed.<\/p>\n

But the question was, can the Court do so?<\/strong><\/p>\n

To the above, the answer was Court cannot. Further, it was elaborated that \u201cA decree can be set aside under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. In the Supreme Court decision of Ram Prakash Agarwal v. Gopi Krishna, <\/em>(2013) 11 SCC 296<\/a>, it was held that the applicant must have been a party to the suit, in the first place, whereas Supreme Court in Raj Kumar v. Sardari Lal, <\/em>(2004) 2 SCC 601<\/a>, took a different view and stated that the same was in the context of a lis pendens purchaser.<\/p>\n

Bench coming back to the present matter, expressed that:<\/p>\n

Subhash has a highway or a thoroughfare to travel on if ever he wants to reach his judicial destination: a separate suit, seeking a declaration.<\/p>\n

Looking at the issue from another perspective, Court stated that in a suit for specific performance, whatever be its outcome, no third party can have the role to play.<\/p>\n

Precedential Position<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

Ajay Kumar v. Tulsabai, <\/em>1973 SCC OnLine Bom 4<\/a>, Court held that by very nature, a suit for specific performance confines itself to the agreement and several please that can either defeat or lead to its enforcement. The cause of action in such a suit is the agreement and its enforceability.<\/span><\/p>\n

In the above-cited case, Court posed a question unto itself: Can it really be said that the stranger to an agreement is concerned with the relief sought by the plaintiff or the defences raised against such specific performance? The answer was that, firstly the stranger not being a party to the suit, any decision in that suit does not affect him. Secondly, the Court is being called upon to enforce the agreement but not to settle any disputes between the plaintiff and the stranger, therefore such a person\u2019s presence is not necessary for the Court to decide the controversy of the suit.<\/p>\n

In Panne Khushali v. Jeewanlal Mathoo Khatik<\/em>,\u00a0 AIR 1976 MP 148, \u00a0a Full Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh has held that strangers to the contract making a claim adverse to the title of the defendant\u2014for example, that they are the co-owners of the contracted property\u2014are neither necessary nor proper parties. So they are not entitled to be joined as parties to the suit.<\/p>\n

Delhi High Court in its decision of Raj K. Mehra v. Anjali Bhaduri, <\/em>1981 SCC OnLine Del 105<\/a>, echoed the same view as above.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

In view of the above, Court proceeded to examine the issue:<\/p>\n

(1) The agreement was between Rajesh and Sudarshan.<\/p>\n

(2) From the very inception, Subhash represented Rajesh as his POA in the suit; thus, he knew his brother\u2019s pleadings and assertions to the exclusion of everyone else.<\/p>\n

(3) Despite that, Subhash never objected to his principal\u2019s (Rajesh\u2019s) contentions.<\/p>\n

(4) Though Rajesh, as the principal, cancelled GPA in 2017, Subhash never attempted, if ever permissible, to come on record as a defendant to protect his independent interest, if any.<\/p>\n

(5) The suit was eventually decreed in 2001.<\/p>\n

(6) Sudarshan willingly suffered the decree and deposited the amount to be appropriated by Rajesh alone.<\/p>\n

Collateral Issue:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Subhash insisted that this Court in its Order dated 16-04-2012 noted that Subhas, too, contributed to the sale consideration.<\/p>\n

To the above contention Bench stated that to facilitate adjudication of the matter, the Court undertakes various steps and during that process, Court prima facie observe or record certain aspects based on the counsel\u2019s representation but the same does not acknowledge the parties existing rights if any, but they do not create rights on their own.<\/em><\/p>\n

A Court\u2019s observation cannot give rise to a right unless it has already existed, nor does it provide a cause of action. Here, in this case, it had never been in the Court\u2019s contemplation as to who contributed the sale consideration. It is a non sequitur.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Concluding the matter<\/strong>, Court held that however strong a person\u2019s right to recovery may be, he cannot file an intervention application in an already disposed of matter and stay the execution of the decree or nullify the decree without proper judicial recourse.<\/p>\n

In view of the above discussion, Court dismissed the application. [Rajesh Saichand Sharma v. Sudershan Gangaram Rajula,\u00a0 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 835<\/b><\/a>, decided on 11-06-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates before the Court:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a\/w Mr. Abhishek P. Deshmukh – Advocate for the Applicant.<\/p>\n

Sukeshi Bhandari a\/w Akshay Chauhan – Advocate for the Defendants.<\/p>\n

Mr. Chandrakant N. Chavan a\/w Mr. Rajesh Sharma \u2013 Advocate for Plaintiff.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay HC\u2019s Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu while discussing, quotes EBC\u2019s C.K. Thakker\u2019 s Code of Civil Procedure<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2518,46246,3174,2713,4701,29785,46245,32659,35625,32110,32503,31861],"class_list":["post-249875","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-c-k-thakker-ebc","tag-contract","tag-decree","tag-ebc","tag-law","tag-party","tag-power-of-attorney","tag-recovery-amount","tag-right-to-recovery","tag-specific-performance","tag-suit"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Property Suit\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Property Suit\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2021-06-16T13:56:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-04-11T05:52:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-16T13:56:26+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-04-11T05:52:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Property Suit\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on | SCC Times","description":"Property Suit","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on","og_description":"Property Suit","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-16T13:56:26+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-04-11T05:52:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/","name":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2021-06-16T13:56:26+00:00","dateModified":"2022-04-11T05:52:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Property Suit","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/16\/property-suit\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | In a property suit in which decree has been passed, can a third party\u2019s intervention application claiming his right to recovery be maintainable? Read on"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":301241,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/11\/delhi-hc-refuses-specific-performance-relief-creation-third-party-interests-compensation-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court refuses decree of specific performance in view of creation of third-party interests; Directs compensation of Rs. 15 lakhs","author":"Arunima","date":"September 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The principle governing the evidence in civil cases is that there should be a preponderance of the events which should be proved unlike in criminal matters, where the evidence have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, the burden of proof is on the party which will suffer if\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":231029,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/06\/18\/specific-performance-principles-revisited\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":1},"title":"Specific Performance — Principles Revisited","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 18, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Karl Shroff*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/Specific-Performance.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/Specific-Performance.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/Specific-Performance.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/Specific-Performance.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/Specific-Performance.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304701,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/14\/lack-of-property-title-renders-suit-for-specific-performance-unenforceable-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":2},"title":"Lack of property title renders Suit for specific performance unenforceable: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"October 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court determined that the compromise decree indicated that the vendors-defendants (respondent 2 and 3) do not have title to the property.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":294230,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/08\/recognition-of-poa-will-agreement-to-sell-as-title-documents-conferring-rights-in-immovable-property-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":3},"title":"Whether power of attorney, will, agreement to sell can be recognised as title documents conferring rights in any immovable property? Supreme Court answers","author":"Apoorva","date":"June 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court said that the entry of the appellant over part of the suit property is simply as a licencee of the respondent. He does not continue to occupy it in the capacity of the owner. Thus, the licence having been terminated, he has no right to remain in possession\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"conferring rights in immovable property","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/conferring-rights-in-immovable-property.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":327091,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/22\/19b-sra-decree-specific-performance-subsequent-purchaser-directed-execute-sale-deed-with-original-vendor-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":4},"title":"Not mandatory for plaintiff in specific performance suit to seek cancellation of subsequent sale deed executed by seller in favour of informed third party: SC","author":"Editor","date":"July 22, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Section 19(b) provides that a specific performance of a contract may be enforced against any other person claiming under him by a title arising subsequently to the contract, except a transferee for value who has paid his money in good faith and without notice of the original contract.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"S. 19(b) Specific Relief Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/sale-2.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/sale-2.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/sale-2.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/sale-2.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281767,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/17\/split-verdict-whether-non-production-poa-during-suit-to-prove-sale-deed-which-was-executed-on-strength-of-poa-would-fatal-to-case-of-plaintiff-legal-news-legal-research-updates-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":249875,"position":5},"title":"Whether non-production of Power of Attorney to prove a sale deed would be fatal to the case of the plaintiff?; Supreme Court’s split verdict","author":"Editor","date":"January 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"While Justice Shah stated that the plaintiff had not produced the Power of Attorney, Justice Nagarathna opined that non-production of Power of Attorney was not fatal to the case of the original plaintiff.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-98.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249875","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=249875"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/249875\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=249875"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=249875"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=249875"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}