Punjab & Haryana HC: Doctrine of Lis Pendens Applied, Impleadment of Subsequent Purchaser Set Aside in Property Dispute

Case Name: Sarabjit Kaur & Ors. v. Baljit Kaur & Ors.
Date of Judgment: September 29, 2025
Citation: CR No. 6600 of 2025
Bench: Hon’ble Ms. Justice Mandeep Pannu

Held: The High Court allowed the revision petition and set aside the trial court’s order impleading a subsequent purchaser as a party in a pending property suit. It held that a transferee pendente lite, who acquires property during the pendency of litigation, is bound by the decree under the doctrine of lis pendens embodied in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, irrespective of whether he had knowledge of the proceedings or injunction order. Such a purchaser is neither a necessary nor a proper party, and impleadment would frustrate the very purpose of Section 52 .

Summary: The plaintiffs had filed a civil suit in May 2024 challenging a sale deed of 08.09.2022. The trial court had restrained defendants from alienating the property. Despite the injunction, defendant no.2 sold the property in June 2024 to Amit Walia, who then sought impleadment under Order I Rule 10 CPC as a bona fide purchaser. The plaintiffs opposed, contending his purchase was hit by lis pendens and citing Vidur Impex & Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. Tosh Apartments Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 8 SCC 384. The trial court nevertheless allowed impleadment, holding bona fides could be decided only at trial. The High Court reversed, observing that the transferee pendente lite automatically remains bound by the decree, whether impleaded or not, and that allowing impleadment would complicate and delay proceedings. It reiterated that lis pendens protects the subject matter of litigation and applies irrespective of actual knowledge .

Decision: The High Court set aside the trial court’s order dated 20.05.2025, disallowed impleadment of the subsequent purchaser, and directed the trial court to proceed expeditiously with the suit between the original parties .