properties cannot be transferred between defendants as stay order has been passed by civil court
Transfer of suite properties between defendants
Can suite properties be transferred between defendants based on injunction order stating "defendants are hereby restrained from alienating suit properties in any manner or creating any third party interest over it till final disposal of the suit"
Asked 3 hours ago in Property Law
Religion: Other
7 Answers
No. If the court has restrained defendants from alienating the suit property or creating third-party rights, they generally cannot transfer it—even among themselves. Such a transfer can still change ownership or possession and breach the order. Any such act may be set aside and could attract contempt, unless the court’s prior permission is obtained.
During the subsistence of an injunction order, any such transfer as proposed in your query will be considered as contempt of court order and the violater can be prosecuted under criminal laws.
Why would a judge hold on passing order on set aside No-WS Order for nearly a year. This is reported as a pending matter at every hearing
Asked 2 hours ago
Request judge to pass order as it is pending for year and defendants have not filed any reply for a year
judge must be wanting to give time to defendants to file reply to avoid defendants going in appeal against his order of no WS
The judge may be basically thinking: “Should I be strict about delay, or give one last chance?” That balancing act often causes delay. Politely nudge and ask for a fixed date for arguments.
Background to the above question is ..... No-WS order was passed after 90 days. Defendants came back with WS and application to set aside No-WS order. As part of TI, brought about issue of evasive denial and all pleadings being deemed accepted in WS. Defendant came back with another WS after 120 days and this WS was exhibited inspite of objections. This new WS was relied for TI Order. Even though TI is still in our favour, we have lost the benefit of pleadings being deemed accepted now due to the new WS. Order for setting aside No-WS Order and objection to the second WS are the only pending orders. What could be the reasoning for holding these two orders still?
Asked 2 hours ago
judge must be having lot of cases on baord . hence not passing orders
The judge has already relied on the second written statement while deciding the TI. So if the court now rejects that WS or refuses to set aside the No-WS order, it would contradict its own earlier order. Courts generally avoid putting themselves in that position. If you want movement, you’ll have to push and ask for a specific hearing on these applications or request the court to decide them as preliminary issues. Otherwise, they may remain pending till final arguments.