Introduction

The Transfer of Property Act [hereinafter TOPA] is a legislation that filled the lacuna in the set up of Indian
Laws. This lacuna was a combined result of the fact that earlier, with a predominant panchayati system, custom
was the main tool of effectuating transfers. However, a little before Independence, this trend had changed to
English Law which governed the field of transfer of property. While it was a welcome change as it brought a
standard rule across the country, it was a flawed concept as the English idea of justice could not be applied
strictly to the socio-economic potpourri of Indian conditions. [1] What followed was a slightly adapted form of
the same rules by modifying it using judicially-created notions of equity justice and good conscience. There
were certain instances when this discretion would go contrary to the precedent set by the application of English
Law and thus, create further confusion.
in order to help you with your studies. This is not an example of the wor
It would be acceptable to state thus, that there would have been a fundamental requirement of a domestic
legislation which could create a compendium of the applicable English Law on the matter in India along with
these judicially created notions of equity justice. With the advent of TOPA, one such principle of lis pendens
was introduced which acted as a regulator on the transfers effectuated. The concept of lis pendens is a common
law concept which pertains to the parties to a litigation, the subject matter of which is property. It aims to
prevent the alienation of the said property when the litigation concerning the same is pending before the
court. [2]
This project will delineate the meaning, purpose and implementation of the concept of lis pendens and its
application in the TOPA and other legislations like the Code of Civil Procedure. The researcher will analyze
the scope of Section 52 of the TOPA and its application in Property Law. Finally, the project will look into the
pertinent judgments on the said doctrine and attempt to formulate a model of how the application of lis
pendens has changed over the years and the ultimate end it has served.

Chapter I: Analysis Of Section 52, Topa

The question of lis pendens is dealt with substantially in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. Section 52
states:
During the pendency in any Court having authority [...] of any suit or proceeding which is not collusive and in
which any right to immovable property is directly and specifically in question, the property cannot be
transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to affect the rights of any other
party thereto under any decree or order which may be made therein except under the authority of the court and
on such terms as it may impose. [3]

Meaning
From a plain reading of Section 52, it is clear that the underlying aim of the same is to protect the sanctity of
court proceedings, the subject matter of which is immovable property. To elaborate, there will be instances

when two parties will go to court with a dispute at the centre of which lies immovable property. Once, they
approach the court, the property in question is assigned a special status. This is so as the determination of the
court ultimately decides the rights of the parties over the property. With this material determination at stake, it
would be extremely prejudicial to the rights of any party, if the other transferred the property in question,
before the court arrives at an outcome in the pending litigation. Such an act would defeat the entire purpose of
the litigation process and would render the determination of the court null and void. The ramification of such
an act even amounts to subverting the jurisdiction of the court as the partys action of transferring the property
before his right to do so, has been confirmed by the court amounts to contempt of the court proceedings. [4]

Court
The provision places a special emphasis on the fact that the litigation in question must be pending in a court
having authority. There are various implications of this phrase.
Firstly, it precludes any jurisdiction that could be afforded to a tribunal. Tribunals that look into the disputes
concerning immovable disputes do not have the same power as courts. This is due to their inherent functional
disabilities. It is established that a Tribunal is merely a body with all the trappings of a court, but is not a court
itself. [5]
Secondly, the emphasis on court is a sign of intent by the legislature that the implementation of the word
court is for achieving the ends of the provision. If the purpose of the provision is to prevent a party from
alienating a property which is the subject matter of the dispute, pending litigation in a court, it is necessary that
the court in question must be the appropriate forum to adjudicate upon the dispute. In other words, it should
have sufficient authority to deal with the issue and make a final determination of the rights of the parties over
the property.
Finally, the requirement of having a court which can deal with the matter conclusively is that it will help affix
the rights of the parties pertaining to the property in question.

TThis is essential as the courts determination of who hold the rights over the property will ultimately affect
the right of the transferee who might have received the property pending the disposal of the dispute.

Directly And Specifically In Question

The provisions of TOPA mandate that in order to effectuate the utilisation of Section 52, it is necessary that the
matter pending before the court pertains substantially and directly to immovable property. [6] This means that
if one party to a suit transacts with a third party regarding property X, for the application of Section 52 and to
bar this transaction, it is necessary that the subject matter of the original suit is property X.
This statement implies two things: firstly, the property which is the subject matter of the suit must be similar to
the one which is transacted upon by a party to the suit with a third party. Secondly, it is mandatory that the

subject matter of the dispute in court must be property. In other words, this property must form the crux of the
dispute in court. [7]

Suit Or Proceedings
Section 52 has been careful to include a wise use of terminology regarding the status of the litigation before the
courts. This ensures maximum protection of the parties to the suit to such that their rights over the property are
not infringed by an unauthorised alienation.
In this provision, the court had carefully tied up the use of the words suit or proceedings with thereto under
any decree or order. This is so as the decree is passed by the court while the order is connected to the
proceedings carried on in court. The suit is instituted in court on the basis of presentation of plaint while the
proceedings occur on the basis of an application.
In order to ensure that the rights of the parties to the litigation are not infringed, the provision mandates that the
suit or proceeding in question be contentious in nature. [8] It tries to prevent collusion between a party to the
suit and a third party in order to prevent another to alienate the property. [9] The idea is to disallow alienation
of property which is a subject matter of the suit if and only if, the suit in question is not a product of collusion
between parties to prevent another from alienating the property.

Question Of Pendency
Section 52 provides that alienation of property is impossible when the same is part of a suit between two
parties. The statute provides that this bar will apply for the period when the suit is pending before the
court. [10] In other words, till the time the litigation persists in court, it is impossible for the parties to alienate
the property which is the subject matter of the dispute. This is so as any alienation of the property will be
subject to the decision that the court arrives at.
Prior to 1929, it was disputed as to what was meant by the phrase pendency of suit and how this rule would
bar any alienation. After the passing of the amendment in 1929 however, this position was clarified. The
Explanation to Section 52 provides that the word pendency refers to the period starting from when the suit or
proceeding is instituted in court till the time of the final disposal of the suit or proceedings. It provides that
final disposal of the matter will be regarded on the passing of a decree or order. The suit would no longer be
pending however, when the passing of decree or suit is impossible in case of the period of limitation for
seeking remedy expiring. [11]
Simply put, a case will be said to be pending in court from the moment of its institution till the point of its final
disposal by the court. The Explanation qualifies this statement in many ways.
Firstly, the matter before the court can be initiated by way of presentation of plaint in case of a suit as well by
institution of proceedings. Thus, a fresh suit can be initiated or an application can be presented for initiating
proceedings. [12]
Secondly, the matter must be initiated in a court that must be competent to hear it and pass a decision on it.
This is particularly important as the crux of the provision deals with affecting the rights of the parties to the

suit. These rights can only be affected by a court which is competent to adjudicate upon the dispute between
them. Only when the competent court looks into matter, will the case be said to be pending. During this stage
of pendency, alienation will be impossible. [13]
Finally, there must be no more scope left in the decision-making of the case. In other words, either case must
be dealt with by a final decree or order or the chance of getting remedy is nullified owing to the period of
limitation expiring. In both these cases, the litigation will come to an end. Thus, in such a case, the matter
cannot be said to be pending and alienation will be allowed. [14]

Chapter II: Lis Pendens

The doctrine of lis pendens gets its origins from the latin maxim Pendente lite nihil innovetur which implies
during the pendency of the suit, nothing new must be introduced. [15] The concept of lis pendens has been
enshrined in Section 52. This doctrine provides for the protection of the rights of the parties to litigation. It
states that during the pendency of a suit, the parties cannot alienate the property which is the crux of the
dispute so as to prevent them from causing harm to each other. [16]
Lis Pendens is the power a court enjoys over the property which is the subject matter of the dispute. The
exposition of this doctrine indicates that the requirement for this concept arises from the very nature of the
control exercised by the court over the property which is the subject matter of the dispute. This is the power of
preventing the alienation of the same property till the time the dispute is settled finally by the court. This
doctrine literally means pending suit and amounts to the jurisdiction, power and control that the court exercises
in order to prevent alienation of the property, the rights over which are hitherto undecided. [17]
The purpose behind the implementation of this concept is that the rights of the parties to the litigation must be
protected from infringement. This is done by assigning a special status to the property which is the subject
matter of the dispute. When the parties have come before the court to let it decide about their rights over a
certain property, it is necessary that no party is allowed the benefit of alienating the said property. Allowing
this power to a party would subvert the jurisdiction of the court. [18] This power would be an affront to the
decision of the court hearing the dispute. It would lead to the frustration of the decree of the court.
This is so as the duty of the court is to adjudicate upon the rights of the parties regarding the property in
question. If one of the parties can alienate the same property, it would nullify the point of the entire litigation
and put the other party at a disadvantage as he is left remediless. To prevent this unfair eventuality, the concept
of lis pendens acts as a check on the power of alienation of property to prevent infringement of the rights of the
parties. By doing so, the subject matter of the dispute does not become a nullity and in fructuous.
Various decisions have held that the concept not only prevents transfer of rights over the property but is wide
enough to include all dealings with the property to affect the rights of the party thereto. Thus, this doctrine has
a wide ambit in its application. [19]
The effect of this doctrine is that if the concerned property is alienated to a third party, that party will be
affected by the decree passed by the court. This is an anomaly considering the fact that the third party has not
even been impleaded in the matter. [20] The property over which the rights of the parties to the litigation were
to be decided now vests with the alienee. Owing to this, his right over the property is subject to the order or
decree of the court. By doing so, the object of the original suit is not defeated. [21]

The effect of lis pendens arises from the fact that rights cannot be given to an assignee of the alienator over the
original holder of the property. The law protects the right of the parties to not have their rights over the
property in question vitiated owing to the act of one party. It also protects the rights of the original holder
against the demands of the alienee. The alienee is made bound to the decision of the court as well and cannot
override the interests of the holder of the property. [22]

This law essay is an

example of a student's
This essay has been submitted to us by a student in order to help you with your studies. This is not an example

Scope Of Lis Pendens

The scope of lis pendens even though wide, does not actually bar transfers effectuated by the parties during the
pendency of the suit. It merely keeps all transfers on hold and its validity is dependent on the outcome of the
pending suit. This means that the alienee who is the beneficiary of the transfer will be affected by the order of
the court and will be bound by it. [23]
In other words, this section aims to maintain status quo ante until the final determination is made by the court.
Only after this pendency comes to an end after the passing of the decree or order will the rights of the parties to
the suit and if the case demands, of the alienee be decided conclusively.

Chapter III: Application In Judgments

Section 52 and the concept of lis pendens have been delineated above. The doctrine, as I have already shown,
has a wide scope of application. The courts in India have applied this doctrine to a string of different cases and
refused to apply it in others.
However, the application of the section has been restricted by applying the caveat that the subject matter of the
pending litigation must be the property in question. Lis pendens does not apply to those suits in which the right
over the immovable property is not in question. Examples of such cases include suit for damages limited to a
money demand [24] or suit for rent of an agricultural holding. [25]
In a matrimonial case, the wife sued her husband for maintenance. In this case, the husband alienated the
property and the wife claimed that this transfer was barred owing to the application of the doctrine of lis
pendens. This was rejected by the court as the property in question was not the direct subject matter of the
suit. [26] However, in another case for maintenance, the court created a charge on the property in order to
effectuate the payment of maintenance. In this case, the court held that lis pendens would apply and the
transfer would be subject to the decree of the court. [27]
The rule of lis pendens is applicable in the suits for specific performance as well. A suit may have been
transferred to a transferee without informing him that the property is tied to an earlier contract, elsewhere.
However, his payment of consideration in good faith will not override the application of lis pendens and the
transfer will eventually be subject to the decision of the court regarding specific performance. [28] The
doctrine will still apply as it is based on public policy. [29]

Lis Pendens applies in cases of mortgage as well. However, in a suit of mortgage where only a money decree is
given, this concept has no application. This is because the direct subject matter of the suit is not the property in
question. [30]
In a partition suit, clearly the subject matter of the dispute is property. In such a case, the purchaser of the
property will be bound by the decision of the court and will get a share out of the part allotted to the seller by
the court. [31] This rule was upheld even in the case when a suit for partition was instituted by a family
member and the property was given away by the karta. Here too, lis pendens was upheld. [32]
This doctrine applies to the suits pertaining to pre-emption. This is so as the subject matter of a suit for preemption is the property in question. This view was upheld in a case where the property in question could not be
transferred once the suit for pre-emption had been instituted until it had been finally declared. This was so as
otherwise, alienation would interfere with the plaintiffs rights who had filed a suit for pre-emption. [33]
Further, suits filed in order to claim rent do not attract application of lis pendens as it is assumed that the same
do not constitute a charge on the property in question. Hence, in suits for rent, the property is not the subject
matter of the dispute. Thus, transfer of the property would not attract the application of lis pendens. [34]
Finally, the doctrine of lis pendens applies even to the involuntary transfers of property such as those, ordered
by court. A suit for maintenance creating a charge on property will affect the rights of the decree-holder in a
money suit even though he has no links to the former suit. He will be bound by the decree of the court ordering
a court sale and the doctrine of lis pendens has application here. [35]

Conclusion
The concept of lis pendens is enshrined within Section 52 of the TOPA. It is a public policy concept which
aims to safeguard the rights of the parties to the suit by ensuring that the rights over the property in question is
not alienated during the pendency of the suit. This ensures that while the matter is pending in court, the
property is assigned a special status. Thus, with this protection, the suit is prevented from being infructuous by
an alienation of the property. Not applying lis pendens would amount to making the decision of the court a
nullity.
Section 52 has been discussed in detail in this project. I have delineated how the concept of lis pendens applies
provided the suit is initiated in a court of competent jurisdiction. Here, the court must pass an order or decree
concluding the matter at hand where the subject matter of the dispute is the property in question. The court
must be competent as it must decide upon the rights of the parties to the suit.
Finally, this project has gone into numerous case laws to discuss the scope of the application of the doctrine of
lis pendens. Courts, over the decades have decided upon the application of this doctrine differently, depending
upon the type of case in discussion. It has a sufficiently wide scope and applies even to suits involving court
sales or involuntary sales. Thus, it covers within its ambit, not only voluntary transfers but involuntary
transfers as well. The Delhi High Court has gone ahead to state that even in cases where the TOPA does not
apply, its underlying principle of lis pendens will still apply.
The concept of lis pendens as enshrined in Section 52 is thus, a welcome concept and one which will go a long
way to protect the rights of the parties over the property which is the subject matter of the dispute between

them. It achieves this objective along with ensuring that that the parties to the suit as well the third party to
whom the suit has been alienated respects the decree or order of the court. Thus, the transfer of property during
the pendency of the suit is not barred. However, the transfer will be subject to the finding of the court. This
ensures that justice is not only done but appears to be done.

Read more at Law Teacher: http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/land-law/the-west-bengal-nationaluniversity-law-essays.php#ixzz3mpRzPGWj

Intro DUCTION:Lis Pendens' generally means "pendency of a suit in a Court". It

embodies the principle that the subject matter of the suit should not be transferred
to third party during the pendency of the suit. The transferee is bound by the result
of the suit in a case when such property is transferred during the pendency of the
suit.This doctrine aims at the final adjudication of the dispute. Nothing new should
be brought ina litigation. It helps to prevent multiplicity of suits. The essential
condition for the application of this doctrine is that the right to immovable property
must be directly and specifically in question in the suit. The doctrine is mainly based
upon the principles of equity, justice and good conscience. It is applicable to all
cases between co-heirs. It applies to ex-parte judgements, compromise decrees etc.
It applies to both voluntary transfers and involuntary transfers. The doctrine
is contained in Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act. It is of some interest that a
solution has been found to this problem in the States of Maharashtra by an
appropriate local amendment to section 52 of the Act, by Bombay Act 4of 1939.
Section 52, as applicable in the Maharashtra and Gujarat, reads thus (the
amendment is shown in italics):
52. (1) During the pendency in any court having authority within the limits of India
excluding the State of Jammu and Kashmir established beyond such limits by the
Central Government, of any suit or proceeding which is not collusive and in which
any right to immoveable property is directly and specifically in question, if a notice
of the pendency of such suit or proceeding is registered under section 18 of the
Indian Registration Act, 1908,the property after the notice is so registered cannot be
transferred or otherwise dealt with by any party to the suit or proceeding so as to
affect the rights of any other party thereto under any decree or order which may be
made therein, except under the authority of the court and on such terms as it may
impose.(2) Every notice of pendency of a suit or proceeding referred to in subsection (1) shall contain the following particulars, namely:-(a) the name and address
of the owner of immoveable property or other person whose right to the
immoveable property in question;
(b) the description of the immoveable property the right to which is in question;(c)
the court in which the suit or proceeding is pending;(d) the nature and title of the

suit or proceeding; and(e) the date on which the suit or proceeding was instituted.
The suit must be pending in a court of competent jurisdiction. So if the suit is filed in
a courtnot of competent jurisdiction, it is not a suit pending as per Section 52 of the
Transfer of Property Act. The doctrine of lis pendens is an expression of the principle
of the maxim ut lite pendent nihil innovetur (pending litigation nothing new
should be introduced)
.PURPOSE OF LIS PENDENCE To protect the rights of the party causing the
registration of the lis pendens To advise third persons who purchase or contract on
the subject property that they do so at their peril and subject to the result of the
pending litigation May involve actions that deal not only with title or possession of a
property but also with the use and occupation of a property .The litigation must
directly involve a specific property which is necessarily affected by the judgment
The notice of lis pendens is a notice to the whole world that a particular real
property is in litigation. The inscription serves as a warning that one who acquires
interest over litigated property does so at his own risk, or that he gambles on the
result of the litigation over the property A purchaser who buys registered land with
full notice of the fact that it is in litigation between the vendor and third party
stands in the shoes of his vendor and his title is subject tothe incidents and results
of the pending litigation
in Jayaram Mudaliar v. Ayyaswami (AIR 1973 SC 569) this court held that the
purpose of Section 52 of the Act is not to defeat any just and equitable claim, but
only to subject them tothe authority of the court which is dealing with the property
to which claims are put forward.This court in Hardev Singh v. Gurmail Singh
(2007) 2 SCC 404 held that Section 52 of theAct does not declare a pendente lite
transfer by a party to the suit as void or illegal, but only makes the pendente lite
purchaser bound by the decision in the pending litigation.
OBJECTIVE:Rights depend upon remedies. This also holds as good regards the right
to property. Sincespeedy and efficient remedies are of utmost importance, it has to
be ensured that once the person has initiated legal process in court to seek remedy
against any invasion on his right or threat of invasion thereto, the legal process
should not be defeated on account of private deals. Or any transaction, that is
transfer of property in dispute or on account of any other action of any party to such
legal process, otherwise the very purpose of seeking relief against any grievance
would be meaningless and ineffective. In order to ensure that the legal remedy
remains efficient throughout the legal process, jurist have evolved a general
principle known
as lis pendens basing it on the necessity that neither party to the litigation should
alienate
the property in dispute so as to affect his opponent.The principle on which the
doctrine of lis pendens rests explained in the leading acse of Bellamy v Sabine

where Turner L.J. observed It is, as I think, a doctrine common to the Courts both
of Law and Equity, and rests, as I apprehend, upon this foundation that it
would plainly be impossible that any action or suit could be brought
to a successful termination, if alienations pendente lite were permitted to prevail.
The plaintiff would be liable in everycase to be defeated by the defendants
alienating before the judgment or decree, and would be driven to commence his
proceedings de novo, subject again to be defeated by the same courseof
proceeding.
NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS
Section 76. Notice of lis pendens. No action to recover possession of real estate, or
to quiet title thereto, or to remove clouds upon the title thereof, or for partition, or
other proceedings of any kind in court directly affecting the title to land or the use
or occupation thereof or the buildings thereon, and no
judgment , and no proceeding to vacate or reverse any judgment, shall have any
effect upon registered land as against persons other than the parties thereto,
unless a memorandum or notice stating the institution of such action or proceeding
and the court wherein the same is pending, as well as the date of the institution
thereof, together with a reference to the number of the certificate of title, and an
adequate description of the land affected and the registered owner thereof, shall
have been filed and registered. The filing of lis pendens in effect Keeps the subject
matter of litigation within the power of the court until entry of final judgment so as
to prevent the defeat of the latter by successive alienation so Binds the purchaser
of the land subject of the litigation to the judgment or decree that will be
promulgated thereon whether such purchaser is a bona fide purchaser or not
Doesnt create a non-existent right or lien> Purpose of this rule is founded on public
policy and necessity
EFFECT OF SUCH NOTICE
1. It keeps the subject matter of the litigation within the power of the court until the
entry of final judgment so as to prevent the defeat of the latter by successive
alienations2. It binds the purchaser of the land subject of the litigation to the
judgment or decree thatwill be promulgated thereon whether such purchaser is a
bona fide purchaser or not> It is not correct to speak of it as part of the doctrine of
notice, the purchaser pendent elite isaffected not by notice but because the
law doesnt allow litigating parties to give to others, pending the litigation, rights
to the property in dispute so as to prejudice the other party .
NOTICE IS ONLY AN INCIDENT IN THE MAIN CASE; MERITS THEREOFUNAFFECTED
> A notice of lis pendens is ordinarily recorded without the intervention of the court
wherethe action is pending

> It is but an incident in an action, an extrajudicial one. It doesnt affect the merits
thereof.
NOTICE NEED NOT BE ANNOTATED ON THE OWNERS COPY
> Annotation at the back of the original copy of the certificate of title on file with
the RD issufficient to constitute constructive notice to purchasers or other persons
subsequentlydealing with the same property> One who deals with property subject
of a notice of lis pendens cannot invoke the right of a purchaser in good faith
neither can he acquire the rights better than those of his predecessor-ininterest
NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS
WHEN APPROPRIATE
1. Action to recover possession of real property 2. Action to quiet title thereto
3. Action to remove cloud thereon 4. Action for partition 5. Any other proceedings
of any kind in court directly affecting the title to the land or the useor occupation
thereof or the buildings thereon
NOTICE NOT PROPER IN THE FOLLOWING
1. Preliminary attachments 2. Proceedings for the probates o f wills
3. Levies on execution 4. Proceedings for the administration of estate of deceased
persons 5. Proceedings in which the only subject is the recovery of a money
judgment
CONTENTS OF NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS
1. A statement of the institution of an action or proceedings 2. The court where the
same is pending 3. The date of its institution 4. A reference to the number of
certificate of title of the land 5. An adequate description of the land affected and its
registered owner
PRINCIPLE OF PRIMUS TEMPORE, POTIOR JURE; EFFECT OF LIS PENDENS
> The principle of primus tempore, potior jure gains greater significance in the law
on doublesale of immovable property> Reliance on the principle of constructive
notice operates only such upon the registration of the notice of lis pendens> More
fundamentally, a notice of lis pendens is only a warning to the prospective
purchaser or incumbrancer that the particular property is in litigation and that he
should keep his handsoff the same, unless he intends to gamble on the results of
the litigation
CARRY OVER OF NOTICE ON SUBSEQUENT TITLES>

In case of subsequent transfers or sales, the RD is duty bound to carry over the
notice of lis pendens on all titles to be issued> Act of RD in erasing notice of lis
pendens is in plain violation of his duty, constitutesmisfeasance in the performance
of his duties for which he may be held civilly and evencriminally liable for any
prejudice caused to innocent third persons and cannot affect thosewho are
protected by the notice inscribed in the original title
CANCELLATION OF LIS PENDENS
> Ordinarily a notice which has been filed in a proper case cannot be cancelled
while theaction is pending and undetermined, except in cases expressly provided
for by statute> It may be cancelled upon order by the court or upon action by the
Register of Deeds at theinstance of the party who caused the registration of the
notice> While the trial court has inherent power to cancel a notice of lis pendens,
such power isexercised under express provisions of law.
If the annotation was for the purpose of molesting the title of the adverse party
When the annotation isnt necessary to protect the title of the party who caused it
to be recorded Section 77. Cancellation of lis pendens.
Before final judgment, a notice of lis pendens may becanceled upon order of the
court, after proper showing that the notice is for the purpose of molesting the
adverse party, or that it is not necessary to protect the rights of the party
whocaused it to be registered. It may also be canceled by the Register of Deeds
upon verified petition of the party who caused the registration thereof.
At any time after final judgment in favor of the defendant, or other disposition of the
actionsuch as to terminate finally all rights of the plaintiff in and to the land and/or
buildingsinvolved, in any case in which a memorandum or notice of lis pendens has
been registered
as provided in the preceding section, the notice of lis pendens shall be deemed canc
eled uponthe registration of a certificate of the clerk of court in which the action or
proceeding was pendingstating the manner of disposal thereof
Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Lis pendens
is Latin for "suit pending." This may referto any pending lawsuit or to a specific
situationwith a public notice of litigationthat has beenrecorded in the same location
where thetitleof real propertyhas been recorded. This noticesecures aplaintiff'sclaim
on the property so thatthesale, mortgage, or encumbrance of the propertywill not
diminish plaintiff's rights to the property,should the plaintiff prevail in its case.
In somejurisdictions, when the notice is properly recorded, lis pendens is considered

constructive notice to theother litigants or other unrecorded or

subordinatelienholders. The term is sometimes abbreviated as" lis pend
".n

current practice,

lis pendens is a writtennotice that a lawsuit has been filedconcerning real estate,
involving either thetitle to the property or a claimed ownershipinterest in it. The
notice is usually filed inthe county land records office. Recording a lis pendens
against a piece of property alertsa potential purchaser or lender that thepropertys
title is in question, which makesthe property less attractive to a buyer orlender.
After the notice is filed, anyone whonevertheless purchases the land or
propertydescribed in the notice takes subject to theultimate decision of the lawsuit.

The recording office will record a LisPendens upon request of anyone who claimsto
be entitled to do so (e.g. because he hasfiled a lawsuit). If someone else with
aninterest in the property (e.g. the owner)believes the Lis Pendens is not proper,
hecan then file suit to have it expunged.
Some states Lis Pendens statutes require thefiler of the notice, in the event of
achallenge to the notice, to establish that ithas probable cause or a good likelihood
of success on the merits of its case in theunderlying lawsuit; other states do not
havesuch a requirement.
Lis Pendens applies in matters of parentalresponsibility as well.