<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (12) TMI 559 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275753</link>
    <description>The SC set aside the Jharkhand HC&#039;s decision allowing the impleadment of transferees during the pendency of a suit under Order I Rule 10 CPC. The SC emphasized that under Section 52 of the TP Act, property transfer during litigation without court permission is restricted to protect the rights of existing parties. The respondents, as transferees pendente lite, were deemed unnecessary parties, and the appeal was allowed without costs, reinforcing the principle of lis pendens to prevent prejudice in ongoing litigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 559 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275753</link>
      <description>The SC set aside the Jharkhand HC&#039;s decision allowing the impleadment of transferees during the pendency of a suit under Order I Rule 10 CPC. The SC emphasized that under Section 52 of the TP Act, property transfer during litigation without court permission is restricted to protect the rights of existing parties. The respondents, as transferees pendente lite, were deemed unnecessary parties, and the appeal was allowed without costs, reinforcing the principle of lis pendens to prevent prejudice in ongoing litigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275753</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>