https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191572 Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 was treated as non-exhaustive, so a declaratory suit may lie where the claimant shows sufficient legal interest. A mortgagee decree-holder and assignee whose executable interest could be prejudiced by a later lease had standing to seek a declaration, and the relief was maintainable. A lease created during pending litigation was held void against the plaintiff under the doctrine of lis pendens in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act because it created new rights pendente lite; Section 65A(2)(e) did not displace that doctrine. The lease was also invalid under Section 64 of the Civil Procedure Code because the property stood under attachment when executed. en-us Mon, 04 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Apr 2017 16:17:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191572 Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 was treated as non-exhaustive, so a declaratory suit may lie where the claimant shows sufficient legal interest. A mortgagee decree-holder and assignee whose executable interest could be prejudiced by a later lease had standing to seek a declaration, and the relief was maintainable. A lease created during pending litigation was held void against the plaintiff under the doctrine of lis pendens in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act because it created new rights pendente lite; Section 65A(2)(e) did not displace that doctrine. The lease was also invalid under Section 64 of the Civil Procedure Code because the property stood under attachment when executed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Aug 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191572