This petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan challenged concurrent judgments and decrees of the Civil Judge and Additional District Judge, which had decreed the respondents' suit for specific performance against the petitioner. The petitioner argued that he was a bona fide purchaser of the suit property without notice and that the lower courts had failed to address this defence. The core legal issue was whether the petitioner's purchase of the suit property during the pendency of the respondents' specific performance suit barred his claim of being a bona fide purchaser without notice. The Supreme Court observed that the respondents had filed the suit for specific performance in 1992, whereas the petitioner purchased the property subsequently in 1993. The Court held that the petitioner's purchase was squarely hit by the doctrine of lis pendens. Applying its established precedent, the Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the lower courts, found no merit in the petition, and refused leave to appeal.
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---Seeks leave to appeal against the concurrent judgments and decrees i,e, the judgment and decree dated 1-10-2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge Minchinabad whereby respondents' suit for specific performance was decreed and that of learned Additional District Judge, Bahawalnagar dated 14-1-2004 vide which the afore-referred judgment and decree was affirmed and petitioner's appeal was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that petitioner is a bona fide purchaser without notice and the suit for specific performance could not have been decreed; that both the courts have not adverted to this point and that the judgments and decrees are not sustainable.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not denied on court query that the suit for specific performance qua the suit property was filed in the year 1992 whereas petitioner has purchased the said property in the year 1993. Having considered the evidence led, we are of the view that petitioner's case is hit by the principle of lis pendence and the law laid down by this Court in Muhammad Ashraf Butt v.
Muhammad Asif Bhatti (PLD 2007 SC 905) would squarely apply to uphold the judgments and decrees. The same therefore, are unexceptionable. Finding no merit in this petition, it is dismissed and leave refused.