#constructive notice

The court held that limitation under Article 58 for challenging registered settlement deeds begins from the registration date, as Section 3 TPA deems constructive notice to all parties. A plaintiff residing with the executants cannot claim ignorance of deeds registered in 2004 and 2009 until filing suit in 2024. The ruling reinforces that registered documents impart immediate legal knowledge regardless of actual awareness.

Karnataka High Court holds that partition suits challenging a 20-year-old registered partition deed are barred by limitation and lack cause of action, reinforcing that courts must reject such plaints under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The ruling underscores the finality of settled property divisions and protects defendants from vexatious litigation.

The Supreme Court holds that constructive notice through revenue mutation proceedings, even without direct service, starts the three-year limitation clock under Article 137 for challenging a probate. This binds all heirs and successors who should have reasonably discovered the probate through public records, reshaping how probate challenges are timed across India.

Karnataka High Court rules that a purchaser cannot claim bona fide status if they neglect to examine the 10-year encumbrance certificate, as constructive notice of prior registered agreements binds them. The judgment reinforces that due diligence in property transactions is non-negotiable, impacting all subsequent buyers in property disputes.

The Bombay High Court ruled that a bonafide purchaser in actual possession of property, with no notice of a prior registered sale agreement, can defeat a claim for specific performance under Section 20(1) of the Specific Relief Act - even without alleging hardship. This clarifies that possession alone, coupled with lack of constructive notice, suffices to bar specific performance, reshaping how buyers and sellers assess risk in property transactions.

Punjab & Haryana High Court rules that a purchaser cannot claim bona fide protection under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act if they fail to verify the latest mutation entries. Reliance on outdated jamabandi records negates good faith, exposing buyers to legal risks in property disputes.

Bombay High Court holds that an unregistered agreement to sell cannot create constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser, barring specific performance claims under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act.