#subsequent purchaser

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that subsequent purchasers can impugn an ex parte decree for specific performance if the original plaintiff failed to demonstrate readiness to perform or if service was improper. The judgment sets a precedent for third-party challenges in property disputes under the Specific Relief Act, reinforcing procedural fairness in contract enforcement.

Chhattisgarh HC rules that a sale deed executed without co-sharers' consent in ancestral property is void ab initio. Subsequent purchasers, even if transactions are registered, cannot claim independent title if litigation was pending at the time of purchase, reinforcing the doctrine of constructive notice under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that once land is acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, statutory vesting under Section 16 irrevocably extinguishes all prior rights, including promises made in consent orders to return surplus land. This means subsequent purchasers, even those with revenue record mutations, cannot claim title or possession to unutilized portions - reinforcing that only the state holds legal ownership post-acquisition.