We affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division, 134 N. J. Super. 557 (1975). The plaintiff, Mihranian, Inc., (Mihranian) had an equitable interest in Padula’s equitable ownership when he (Padula) contracted with Bond and Mortgage Company of New Jersey (Bond and Mortgage) to purchase the land. When Mihranian rescinded its agreement with Padula, then Mihranian’s vendee’s lien attached to Padula’s interest in the land. That lien and the filing of the complaint to enforce it justified the filing of the lis pendens and Yilla Madrid, Inc. charged with notice by reason of the lis pen-dens took title subject to Mihranian’s equitable lien. Although Bond and Mortgage at the time it closed title knew that Mihranian had rescinded its agreement with Padula, Bond and Mortgage had a right to convey its interest in the property. We express no opinion as to the rights of the respondents inter sese.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Hughes, Justices Mountain, Sullivan, Pashman, Clifford and Schreiber and Judge Kolovsky — -7.

For reversal — None.