Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Monday, 10 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-05-11 allowed

Siddagangaiah (D) Thr. Lrs vs N.K. Giriraja Shetty (D) Thr. Lrs

Bench: 3 — Arun Mishra

In Brief

The plaintiff, N.K. Giriraja Shetty, purchased land from Siddagirigowda by deed dated 9 November 1974 for Rs. 10,000. Unbeknownst to him (or rather, being aware of a pending maintenance suit filed in 1968 by Siddagirigowda's wife Thopamma), the property was subject to a charge when Thopamma obtained a maintenance decree in 1976. In execution of that decree, a court auction in 1977 sold the property to Thopamma as the decree-holder. Giriraja filed an application to set aside the auction under CPC Order XXI Rule 90, which was dismissed in default. He then filed a suit claiming declaration and possession. The Supreme Court held that the dismissal of his application created a bar under Rule 92(3), preventing the suit. The 1974 sale was also subject to the lis pendens doctrine (section 52, Transfer of Property Act) since the maintenance suit was pending. The Court restored the trial court's dismissal and held the plaintiff could not approach the court without clean hands.",

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Civil Procedure Res Judicata Court Auction Sale Lis Pendens Bona Fide Purchaser Transfer of Property Maintenance Decree Execution Proceedings

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login