https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199842 A transfer of property made during the pendency of a suit gives the transferee an interest that can be worked out in the proceeding, and such transferee may seek impleadment under Order 22 Rule 10(1) CPC. A sale made in breach of an injunction order is not a nullity merely because it contravened the restraint; the consequence lies in penal or coercive action for disobedience, not automatic invalidity of the sale. The position differs from attachment, where Section 64 CPC expressly voids private transfers against enforceable claims. The transferees were therefore entitled to be impleaded as defendants. en-us Wed, 12 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2018 11:00:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199842 A transfer of property made during the pendency of a suit gives the transferee an interest that can be worked out in the proceeding, and such transferee may seek impleadment under Order 22 Rule 10(1) CPC. A sale made in breach of an injunction order is not a nullity merely because it contravened the restraint; the consequence lies in penal or coercive action for disobedience, not automatic invalidity of the sale. The position differs from attachment, where Section 64 CPC expressly voids private transfers against enforceable claims. The transferees were therefore entitled to be impleaded as defendants. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199842