1. On the 12th August 1892 there was executed in the appellant's favour by the other defendant a mortgage of certain property in the Madura district which, at the time, was the subject of proceedings in a suit brought by the plaintiff in Singapore. This latter suit was founded upon an hypothecation of the property, which, as it was not registered, would not in itself create any charge. The Subordinate Judge has decreed in favour of the plaintiff on the ground that the mortgage taken by the appellant was taken subject to the result of the suit in the Singapore Court. He considers that the doctrine of lis pendens applies.
2. We are unable to agree with him. The 52nd Section of the Transfer of Property Act expressly limits the operation of the doctrine to suits in British India. Moreover, on general principles it is clear that a purchaser cannot be affected immediately by proceedings in a foreign Court. The decree of a foreign Court cannot directly affect land situated in British India. It can only create an obligation notice of which might possibly affect third parties. In the present case at the date of the appellant's mortgage there was no decree purporting to operate upon the land and it is not alleged that the appellant had had notice of such decree as had been passed.
3. The Subordinate Judge has not decided the ninth issue which raises the question whether there was really a mortgage. We must reverse the decree so far as the appellant is concerned and remand the case for trial. Costs to abide and follow the result.