https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196398 In a suit for specific performance, a transferee pendente lite who acquires title in breach of an injunction and after undue delay is not a necessary or proper party for impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC. The transfers made contrary to the restraint order lacked legal sanctity for that purpose, so refusal to add the purchasers was upheld. A receiver may also be appointed to preserve the suit property where there is a real risk of further alienation or frustration of the proceedings. The later protective order was sustained because the earlier Delhi litigation and injunction had not been properly disclosed in the subsequent proceedings. en-us Tue, 21 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jun 2018 10:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196398 In a suit for specific performance, a transferee pendente lite who acquires title in breach of an injunction and after undue delay is not a necessary or proper party for impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC. The transfers made contrary to the restraint order lacked legal sanctity for that purpose, so refusal to add the purchasers was upheld. A receiver may also be appointed to preserve the suit property where there is a real risk of further alienation or frustration of the proceedings. The later protective order was sustained because the earlier Delhi litigation and injunction had not been properly disclosed in the subsequent proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196398