S & D International Pty Ltd (in liq) v Malhotra

In the case of S & D International Pty Ltd (in liq) v Malhotra, the appellant, S & D International Pty Ltd, a company in liquidation, sought to remove a caveat lodged by the respondent, Malhotra. The dispute centred around a unit trust and the validity of the caveat, with the liquidators seeking to sell the property to satisfy their fees and costs. Malhotra, claiming an interest in the property, lodged a caveat over the title to prevent the sale. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, with the appeal against the refusal to terminate the liquidation and remove the caveat.

The primary legal issue was whether Malhotra had a caveatable interest in the property, sufficient to justify the continuation of the caveat. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the balance of convenience favoured the removal of the caveat. The liquidators argued that they were entitled to sell the property to satisfy their fees, while Malhotra contended that his interest in the property was sufficient to warrant the caveat remaining in place.

The court found that Malhotra had a caveatable interest in the property, as evidenced by the existence of the unit trust and his potential entitlement to the proceeds from the sale. The court further held that the balance of convenience favoured retaining the caveat, as Malhotra's interest in the property was not insignificant. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the order refusing to terminate the liquidation and remove the caveat was upheld.

This decision reinforces the importance of establishing a caveatable interest when lodging a caveat and highlights the court's willingness to consider the balance of convenience in such matters. The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal and maintain the caveat in place, allowing Malhotra to protect his potential interest in the property.