1941 (8) TMI 21 - HC - Indian Laws

Registrar's Role in Property Transfers Affirmed Under Section 52; Lis Pendens Applicable

The Court dismissed the second appeal, affirming that the Registrar is deemed a Court under Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. It was held that ... - Issues:1. Whether the transfer of property is affected by the doctrine of lis pendens.2. Whether the Registrar under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act is considered a Court for the purpose of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act.3. Whether the decision of the Registrar or arbitrator constitutes a decree or order under Section 52.Detailed Analysis:1. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of money due on a mortgage deed executed by the first defendant. The first defendant had also mortgaged the property to a Co-operative society, leading to a dispute referred to the Registrar under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act. The society later purchased the property and transferred it to a third party. The plaintiff's mortgage was executed after the dispute was referred to the Registrar, raising the issue of whether the transfer is affected by lis pendens, as per Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act.2. The Court established that the Registrar under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act is considered a Court for the purpose of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. Previous decisions confirmed the Registrar's status as a Court, and the term 'Court' in Section 52 was deemed comprehensive enough to include the Registrar or an arbitrator appointed by him. The decision emphasized that the Registrar's role in such disputes falls within the scope of Section 52, supporting the view that the transfer may be affected by lis pendens.3. The judgment clarified that the decision of the Registrar or arbitrator in such proceedings can be viewed as a decree or order under Section 52. Despite arguments to the contrary, the Court held that the word 'order' in Section 52 is used broadly, encompassing decisions made in proceedings before the Registrar. The proceedings under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act were considered equivalent to a suit in a Civil Court, indicating that the doctrine of lis pendens would apply. As a result, the alienation made in favor of the plaintiff could not override the rights established through the Registrar's decision, leading to the dismissal of the plaintiff's suit.In conclusion, the Court dismissed the second appeal, upholding the decision that the Registrar is considered a Court for the purposes of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, and the decision made in the proceedings under the Madras Co-operative Societies Act constitutes a decree or order affecting the transfer of property.