GALGOTIAS UNIVERSITY

School of Law
Winter Semester 2015-16
Model Course Hand Out
Date: 30/11/2015
This document gives specific details regarding the course.
Course Name

: Transfer of Property Law

Course Code

: BAL 614/BBL 614

Instructor-in-Charge

: Dr. Kiran Rai

Course Description
The course on property conventionally deals with the Transfer of Property Act 1882. More than a
century has elapsed since the passing of the Act and far-reaching changes have occurred in the
field in property laws owing to altered social conditions. While archaic feudal rules enacted by
the colonial administration like the rule against perpetuities find a place in the Act, the postindependence development relating to control and use of agricultural land do not find a place.
The obsolescence of the Transfer of Property Act, can be best illustrated by citing the provisions
relating to leases on immovable properties.
The provisions relating to leases under the Act are not applicable to agricultural leases; and even
with respect to urban immovable property, the provisions are not applicable to the most dominant
type, namely, housing under the rent control legislation. Thus the existing syllabus does not
touch upon agrarian property relations, which affect the vast majority of people or aspects
relating to intellectual property which are important in the context of development.
Scope & Objective:
This course introduces to the students the objectives and the background of the Act; theoretical
as well as practical knowledge of property matters and its transfer vis a vis its importance in
family disputes.
Text Books:
T1 Avtar Singh, The Transfer of Property Act, 3rd Edition, Universal Law Publications, New
Delhi, 2013
T2 G. P. Tripathi, Transfer of Property Act, 14th Edition, Central Law Publictions, Allahabad,
2014

Lesson Planning
Lect
ure
No

Un
it

Topic and Sub Topic

History of Enactment of Property

Law

Jurisdiction of Transfer of
Property Act

Laws relating to Transfer of

Property

Concept and meaning of property

- new property.

Kinds of property
movable
and
immovable
property
tangible and intangible property
intellectual property - copyright
patents
and
designs
-trademarks

Definition
of
Immovable
Property
Distinguish between movable and
immovable property

Learning Outcome

Understand
the Chapter I of
concept
of
of T1
properties
dealt
under Transfer of
Property Act.

Benefits to arise out of land,

Things attached to earth

Distinguish between movable and
immovable property

Benefits to arise out of land,

Things attached to earth

Distinguish between movable and
immovable property
Understand
the
concept
of
of
Effects
of
invalid attestation
and
attestation,
notice properties
Difference
between dealt
under
English and Indian law,
Transfer
of
Animo
Attestandi Property Act.
(Intention to attest).

Attestations, its requisites,

Reference
Chap./ Sec.

10

Notice

11

12

13

14

Definition of Transfer of Property

(Sec-5)
Transactions which amount to
and not amount to transfer of
property
What
may
be
transferred
(Section- 6)
Transfer by Unauthorized person
(Section 43) (Doctrine of feeding
the Empty grant by estoppel)

15

Chapter II of
T1

Transfer by Unauthorized person

(Section 43) (Doctrine of feeding
the Empty grant by estoppel)

CAT-I (22-27 February, 2016)

16

Condition Restraining Alienation,

17

Absolute restraint

18

Partial restraint; Its exceptions

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Restriction repugnant to interest

created, its exceptions
Insolvancy and Bankrupcy
Interest
determinable
on
insolvency
or
attempted
alienation.
Interest
determinable
on
insolvency
or
attempted
alienation
Distinction between Section 10
and 11
Burden of obligation of imposing
restriction on use of land
Laws against Perpetuities (section 13 to
18)
Transfer of property in favor of Unborn
person (Section 13),
Transfer of property in favor of Unborn
person (Section 13),
Rule against perpetuities (sec 14),

28

Rule against perpetuities (sec 14),

Understanding the
transfer of property
to unknown/unborn
persons
and
restrictions on it.

29

Its exceptions

30

31

32

33

Creation of interest in favor of a class

(Sec 15)
Vested and Contingent Interest (Section
19 & 21-23) Definition, exception and
distinction
Vested and Contingent Interest (Section
19 & 21-23) Definition, exception and
distinction
Developing
Doctrine of Lis pendens ( Sec 52)
concept
Essentials and exceptions

34

35

Doctrine of Lis pendens ( Sec 52)

Essentials and exceptions
Doctrine of Part Performance (Sec 53A)

36

Essentials Exceptions, transferees rights

37

Sale of immovable property (Sec 54-57) Understanding

Definition of Sale

38

Contract for sale & Distinction

39

Rights and liabilities of buyer and seller

40

Duties of buyer and seller

41

42

Mortgage & Charges (Sec 58 104)

Meaning & Types
Mortgage, Hypothecation & Lease

43

Rights & Liabilities of Mortgagor and

Mortgagee

CAT-II ( 4- 9 April, 2015)

the Chapter III of

sale-purchase
of T1
immovable property
and its registration
process

Understanding the Chapter IV &

concept
of V of T1
Mortgage,
Lease
and
License.
Understanding the
practices prevalent
and examining the
deeds.

44

Rights of redemption

45

46

47

Charges
(Sec
100)definition,
exceptions, distinction between mortgage
and charge
Lease & License (Sec 105 117)Meaning, Types of Lease &
License
Exchange & Gifts (Sec 118 129) Understanding
Exchange - Meaning Rights & Liabilities
of parties

the

the Chapter VI of
legal
obligations T1
attached
while

48

Giftsmeaning,
Revocation

49

Revision

50

Revision

51

Revision

its

acceptance, making

gifts
exchanges

and Chapter
of T1

VII

Syllabus for CAT-I

Module: 1, 2 & 3

Syllabus for CAT-II

Module 4, 5 & 6
Modes of Internal Evaluation

20 marks of Internal Marks would be assessed by following components

Students will be given a chance to choose the evaluation component but for some (fast learners),
course instructor would decide considering their capability. The final authority shall be with the
course instructor.
1) Research Project/ Article Writing

(20 Marks)

2) Class Test (Open Book), Problem based Questions

(10+10)

3) Memorial Writing ( Moot Problem would be related to Property Law

(20)

Evaluation Scheme:
EC
No.

Evaluation Component Duration

Marks (40)

Date & Time

Nature of
Component

CAT-1

90 mins

10

22-27
February,
2016

Closed Book

CAT-II

90 mins

10

4- 9 April,
2015

Closed Book

Class Test-I

30 mins

10

22

Open Book

March,2016
4

Class Test-II

Instead Project/ Memorial

of EC Writing
3& 4

30 mins

10

26 April,
2016

Open Book

20

19 April,
2016

Open Book

Project Topics
S.
No.

Project Topics

Adversity of adverse possession a time to

relook at the doctrine

Scope of Public Trust Doctrine

Right to Fair Compensation for land acquisition in

international scenario

Conflict of interest in State and Central Laws

regarding Property Law

5
Consideration of Legal Environmental Impact
Assessment Requirements in Regional and Local
Landscape Planning
6
Agreement of sale and purchase of land property

Real Estate Developments and Regulation

Forest Rights

Property and Exclusion

10

Land Acquisition Bill: A critical Analysis

11

Property Rights and Markets

12

Property Rights of Women in India: A Critique

Students Name

13

Property Rights of LGBT

14

Mortgage and Bank Loan

15

Rt. to Property of unborn child

16

The problem of defining Immovable Property

17

Jurisprudence of Ownership and Possession and

balancing the conflict of Interest

18

Registration of Property and issue of Attestation

19

Transfer of property by unauthorized person

20

Rule against Perpetuities

21

Registration of Immovable Proprety: Rights and

Liabilities

22

Vested and Contingent Interest in Property

MOOT COURT PROBLEM I

Ghanshyam Das ...Appellant
Versus
M/s. green valley Properties Ltd. ..Respondent
1. The respondent became the owner of the plot no. 05, Phase II, shrikrishna Avenue, Dhanwantri
Nagar, Kanpur measuring about 10568 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the `property in
dispute') by a sale-deed dated 15th of January 1999 executed by the Kanpur Development Board.
2. The appellant and the respondent entered into an agreement for sale of the property in dispute on
1st of December 2003 for a sum of Rs.5,00,00,000/- in which an advance of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Two
Crore Only) was paid to the respondent at the time of executing the agreement for sale. One of the
stipulation in the agreement for sale was that the balance amount of the consideration money shall be
paid to the respondent at the time of registration of the Sale Deed which shall be executed within
ninety days from the date of execution of the agreement for sale. The agreement for sale specifically
mentioned that it was the obligation of the respondent to keep the title good till the execution and
registration of the sale deed and further to keep the property in dispute free from all encumbrances or
charges. It was also agreed that the respondent shall pay all rates, taxes and cesses in regard to the
property in dispute upto the date of sale and all dues prior to the Sale Deed. It was further agreed that
in case of dispute, the same should be referred to Arbitration under the provisions of Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the `Act').
3. The respondent borrowed funds from KDB and various other financial institutions for installation
of various kinds of fittings and fixtures and constructed a huge structure and created equitable
mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds with various financial institutions. It was clearly
understood that at the time of registration of the sale deed, vacant and peaceful physical possession of
property in dispute would be delivered by the respondent to the appellant and that the respondent
would be bound to remove all plants and structure, fittings and fixtures from their plot in order to

deliver possession to the appellant after clearing all its dues to the various financial institutions and
keep the title deed ready.
4. For the purpose of execution of the sale deed, the appellant started doubting its bona-fide and,
therefore, by a letter/notice dated 1 st Feb of February 2004 called upon the respondent to execute the
sale deed so that the vacant possession of the property in dispute could be delivered to him. On 10th
of February 2004, the appellant received a letter from the respondent asking him to complete the sale
transaction on the very next day i.e. on 11th of February 2004. After the receipt of the letter
mentioned above, the appellant approached the respondent and requested the respondent to perform
their part of the obligation. The respondent assured the appellant that they would require some more
time to remove the structure, fittings and fixtures from the property in dispute as they were very huge
in size. They also informed the appellant that they required some more time to make alternative
arrangement of other premises where their fittings and fixtures could be kept as they were very
expensive and involved a lot of money. As the appellant had already paid an amount of
Rs.2,00,00,000/- to the respondent, he had no choice but to keep quiet.
5. The appellant, however, having believed the version of the respondent that they had difficulty in
shifting all the fittings and fixtures within a short notice kept quiet till he realized that the intention of
the respondent was not honest as he found that the respondent was trying to sell the property in
dispute to some other party at a much higher price. Having found that the respondent was not
interested to execute the sale deed as agreed upon, he approached the respondent on 1st of July, 2004
to execute the sale deed, when he also intimated the respondent that he was ready and willing to
perform his part of the contract to execute the sale deed, the respondent refused to perform its part of
the contract and informed that they would not execute the sale deed until and unless the appellant
agreed to pay a higher sale consideration over and above what was agreed to between the parties.
6. Having found that the respondent was trying to sell the property in dispute to a third party at a
higher price, the appellant filed an application under Section 9 of the Act on 23rd of Sep 2004, before
the Civil Judge, Kanpur for injunction restraining the respondent from alienating, altering or creating
any third party interest in respect of the property in dispute. With the application, the appellant also
filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC for temporary injunction
restraining the respondent from transferring, alienating or creating any third party interest in the
same.
7. The respondent entered appearance and denied the material allegations made in the application for
injunction. It was the specific case of the respondent that since time was the essence of the contract
and the appellant having failed to perform his part of the obligation of the contract, the respondent
was not bound to execute the sale deed and therefore, the agreement for sale was cancelled by the
respondent. Accordingly, it was alleged by the respondent that the application for injunction must be
rejected.
8. The Civil Judge at Kanpur by his order dated 20th of November 2004 allowed the application filed
by the appellant, inter alia, on a finding that "there are serious issues to be tried before the arbitrator
and that the appellant has successfully made out a prima facie case for grant of injunction in the
manner prayed for in the application." The learned Civil Judge, Kanpur, while disposing of the
application for injunction, came to a finding prima facie that the respondent intended to sell the
property in dispute to some other persons at a higher price as it was found that the intending
purchasers were frequently visiting for the purpose

of purchasing the property in dispute. The Civil Judge, Kanpur, therefore, held prima facie that the
respondent was likely to sell the property in dispute and if it was sold, it would make the award of the
learned Arbitrator infructuous for which, the appellant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
Accordingly, upon the aforesaid findings, the Civil Judge, Kanpur disposed of the application for
injunction directing the parties to maintain status quo in the matter of transferring, alienating and
creating any third party interest in respect of the property in dispute.
9. It is against this order of Civil Judge, Kanpur, an appeal was filed by the respondent under Section
34 (1) of the Act before the High Court.
10. Before proceeding further, it may be kept on record that in the meantime, an application was filed
under Section 11 of the Act by the appellant before the High Court for appointment of an Arbitrator.
The High Court by its order dated 27th of February 2005 appointed a retired Judge of the High Court
as the sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes raised by the parties.
11. The appeal filed by the respondent against the order of the Civil Judge, Kanpur directing the
parties to maintain status quo, was taken up for hearing by the High Court and the High Court, by its
impugned order, set aside the order of the Civil Judge, Bangalore and made a final order in the
following manner :
2. The order dated 20.11.2004 passed by the Civil Judge, Kanpur in A.A.No.30/04 is set aside subject
to the condition that the appellant deposits a sum of RS.3,00,00,000/- (Rupees Three crores) only in
fixed deposit for a minimum period of six months initially in a nationalized bank and renew the same
till the disposal of dispute before the Arbitrator. The original fixed deposit receipt shall be
surrendered to the arbitrator.
It is this order of the High Court, which was challenged by way of a Special Leave Petition, which on
grant of leave, was heard in the presence of the learned counsel for the parties.
Issuses:1. Whether time was the essence of the Contract?
2. Whether High Court acted arbitrary?
3. Is the scope of arbitration proceeding restricted by the orders of the High Court?
4. Whether the order made by the civil Judge is correct or not?
MOOT COURT PROBLEM II
Ghanshyam Das ...Appellant
Versus
M/s. green valley Properties Ltd. ..Respondent
1. The respondent became the owner of the plot no. 05, Phase II, shrikrishna Avenue, Dhanwantri
Nagar, Kanpur measuring about 10568 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the `property in
dispute') by a sale-deed dated 15th of January 1999 executed by the Kanpur Development Board.
2. The appellant and the respondent entered into an agreement for sale of the property in dispute on
1st of December 2003 for a sum of Rs.5,00,00,000/- in which an advance of Rs.2,00,00,000/- (Two
Crore Only) was paid to the respondent at the time of executing the agreement for sale. One of the
stipulation in the agreement for sale was that the balance amount of the consideration money shall be
paid to the respondent at the time of registration of the Sale Deed which shall be executed within
ninety days from the date of execution of the agreement for sale. The agreement for sale specifically
mentioned that it was the obligation of the respondent to keep the title good till the execution and
registration of the sale deed and further to keep the property in dispute free from all encumbrances or
charges. It was also agreed that the respondent shall pay all rates, taxes and cesses in regard to the

property in dispute upto the date of sale and all dues prior to the Sale Deed. It was further agreed that
in case of dispute, the same should be referred to Arbitration under the provisions of Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short the `Act').
3. The respondent borrowed funds from KDB and various other financial institutions for installation
of various kinds of fittings and fixtures and constructed a huge structure and created equitable
mortgage by way of deposit of title deeds with various financial institutions. It was clearly
understood that at the time of registration of the sale deed, vacant and peaceful physical possession of
property in dispute would be delivered by the respondent to the appellant and that the respondent
would be bound to remove all plants and structure, fittings and fixtures from their plot in order to
deliver possession to the appellant after clearing all its dues to the various financial institutions and
keep the title deed ready.
4. For the purpose of execution of the sale deed, the appellant started doubting its bona-fide and,
therefore, by a letter/notice dated 1 st Feb of February 2004 called upon the respondent to execute the
sale deed so that the vacant possession of the

Teaching Pedagogy
Lecture
Power pt. Presentations
Internet Resources
Court Room Exercises
Seminar Presentation
Chamber Consultation Hour: Everyday 3:00PM to 4:00PM in A-513