Prudeta
Prudeta
2026 INSC 292
📌 Paras 2.1-2.6
The appellants filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement for sale dated December 15, 1986, concerning a portion of an immovable property. The suit was decreed, and a sale deed was executed through the court. Subsequently, respondents 1-3, who were not parties to the original suit, filed an objection petition under Order XXI Rules 99-101 of the CPC, asserting independent title and possession based on sale deeds executed by one Mir Sadat Ali. The respondents claimed title through an alleged oral gift and asserted they were bona fide purchasers for value, not bound by the prior decree, and that execution proceedings were fraudulent. The appellants' prior suits challenging the respondents' sale deeds were dismissed for default.
The bench further analyzed the constitutional validity of the impugned provisions and discussed the interpretation of Articles 14 and 21 in light of recent precedents...
Citing the ratio in prior decisions, the court held that the legislative intent was to ensure...
No credit card required · 14-day free trial