Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Transfer of Property 1882
Transfer of Property 1882
Section 3 - Attested :
in relation to an instrument, means attested by two or more
witnesses each of whom has seen the executant sign or affix his
mark to the instrument,
or has seen some other person sign the instrument in the presence
and by the direction of the executant, or has received from the
executant a personal acknowledgement of his signature or mark, or of
the signature of such other person, and each of whom has signed the
instrument in the presence of the executant;
Mere attestation of document does not mean that the witness had
notice of the content it simply implies that the executant of the
document has signed before attesting witness and therefore estops
from denying the fact.
● Each witness must see—(a) the executant sign or affix his mark
Section 3 - Notice
A person is said to have a notice of a fact when he actually knows that
fact, or when, but for willful abstention from an inquiry or search which
he ought to have made, or gross negligence, he would have known it.
Section 3 of Transfer of Property Act enumerates three kinds of notices
—
(a) Actual or express notice
(b) Constructive or implies notice
(c) Imputed notice.
Exception :
As the transfer of propertyʼ means ‘conveying of propertyʼ, i.e., creation
of new title or interest in the favour of the transferee, if new title or
interest has not created in favour of transferee , the property cannot be
said to be conveyed, thus no transfer of property.
6. Mere right to sue [Section 6(e)] —”A mere right to sue cannot be
transferred.”
A right to sue is personal to the party aggrieved, as for, e.g., damages
for the breach of contract or for tort, claims for past mesne profit for
suing an agent for accounts, for pre-emption, etc. These rights cannot
be transferred. But where the right to sue has merged in a decree, the
right under the decree is assignable. Thus, a right to mesne profit or
damages under a decree is assignable.
7. Public office [Section 6(f)].—”A public office cannot be
transferred, nor can the salary of a public officer, whether before or
after it has become payable.”
Thus prohibition is based on the ground of public policy as the public
office is held for qualities personal to incumbent.
Illustrations
(i) A condition that transferee shall not transfer the property by way of
gift, is a partial restraint and thus valid.
(ii) A condition that transferee shall not transfer the property family/or
to a particular person only, is a partial restraint and thus valid.
(iv) A compromise by way of settlement of family disputes has been
held to be valid, although it involves an agreement in restraint of
alienation.
Exceptions:
G. Lease: When the condition is for the benefit of the lessor or those
claiming under him, it will be valid. Thus a condition in lease that
the lessee should not sublet or assign is valid. The logic behind this
exception is that landlord should be free to choose the person who
shall be in possession of his land.
H. Marriage woman: A condition restraining alienation may be
imposed when the property is transferred to a married woman is
not a Hindu Mohammedan or a Buddhist.
Where any such direction has been made in respect of one piece of
immovable property for the purpose of securing the beneficial
enjoyment of another piece of such property, nothing in this
section shall be deemed to affect any right which the transferor
may have to enforce such direction or any remedy which he may have in
respect of a breach thereof.”
(i) A makes an absolute gift of a house to B with a condition that the gift
will be forfeited if B does not reside in it.
(ii) The transferee should always let the land at a definite rents or
cultivate it in a particular manner.
Exception
The second paragraph of Section 11 provides the exception to the
general rule contained in first paragraph. According to it, the transferor
may impose conditions restraining the enjoyment of land if such
conditions are for the benefit of his (transferorʼs) adjoining land.” Tulk
v. Moxhay, 2 Phill 774.
Illustrations:
(1) A owns two properties X and Y, and sells X to B. A imposes
restriction on B that he shall for the more beneficial enjoyment of Y,
keep open a portion of X enjoyment of Y, keep open a portion of X
adjoining Y and not build on it. The restriction is valid and enforceable
against B.
(2) A owns two properties X and Y and sells X to B and imposes a
condition on B that B shall lay out money in building and repairing a
drain passing over X adjoining Y. The restriction is valid and
enforceable.
(3) A makes an absolute gift of a house to B, and directs that B shall not
raise it higher, so as to obstruct the passage of light and air to Aʼs
adjoining house, the direction will be valid.
In all the transfers for the benefit of the unborn following directions are
followed
● The transfer can himself be a prior interest and can also create any
amount of successive prior interest With whom the property will
rest.
● Before the death of last prior interest the unborn must come into
●
● The day Unborn person comes into existence the property Gets
transferred to the unborn absolutely
Section 14 of the TP act in and see itʼs the modern rule against
perpetuity is concerned with interest arising in future and not with
interest arising in present.
Contingent interest:
The property does not vest in unborn untill he attains majority he only
has a contingest interest in the property. after the death of last prior
interest and before UB attains majority between that period the interest
will ramin contingent on the attaining majority, say for example UB dies
at the age of 15 the property will revert back to transferor if alive or to
his legak heir id dead.
(1) Where the terms of a transfer of property direct that the income
arising from the property shall be accumulated either wholly or in part
during a period longer than—
(a) the life of the transferor, or
(b) a period of eighteen years from the date of transfer,
(2) This section shall not affect any direction for accumulation for the
purpose of—
(i) the payment of the debts of the transferor or any other person
taking any interest under the transferor; or
(ii) the provision of portions for children or remoter issue of the
transferor or of any other person taking any interest under the transfer;
or
(iii) the preservation or maintenance of the property transferred,
and such direction may be made accordingly.
Example:-
– A letʼs a farm to B on the condition that he shall walk 100 miles in an
hour the lease is void.
– A transferred Rs.500 to B on the condition that he shall murder C
the transfer is void
Z. Collateral condition
the subsequent interest will fail in accordance with the intention of the
transferor if Failure of prior interest has not taken place in the manner
specified.
Z. Transfer and the benefit so conferred must form part of the same
transaction
G. Where The transfer is gratuitous and the transfer has before the
election died
H. In all cases where transfer is for consideration
Implied election
In the following circumstances there is a presumption that owner has
knowingly except the benefit.
G. Where is the owner has enjoyed the benefit for 2 years without
doing any act of refusal or descent of the transaction.
Requisition to elect
There is a special procedure for expediting election.
After the expiry of 1 year if owner of the property does not elect i.e
neither confirms nor dissent to transfer.
the transferee may require him to make such election within reasonable
time After which he is deemed to have elected in favour of the transfer.
An ostensible owner is one who has all the indications of ownership but
is not the real owner.
Jack during his lifetime held out his wife as the owner of certain
immovable property by taking the sale deed in her name with a recital
that purchase money was paid out of her stridhan .
After Jackʼs death his wife sold the property to defendant who
purchased it in Bona fired leave and for value. Jackʼs son As heir sued
to recover possession of the property from the defendant it was held
that he could not recover the possession .
The burden of proof whether transferor is ostensible owner lies in the
real owner of the property-(Raj ballar das v. Haripada das 1985)
The rule in this section is based upon the doctrine of a estoppel and
forms an exception to the rule mentioned above .
1989)
Illustration:-
A and B are brothers who had separated from their father, A Sells to C
two fields X and Y representing that he is authorised to transfer the
same of these fields Y does not belong to A, it having been retained by
B partition,
But on Bʼs death A obtains Y.
C not having rescinded the contract of sale may require A to deliver Y
to him.q
G. pendency of a suit
The pendency of the suit continue until the suit or proceeding has been
disposed of by a find decree or order and complete satisfaction or
discharge of such decree or order has been obtained or has become
unobtainable by reason of the expiration of any period of limitation
prescribed (Explanation).
Exception
Section provides that it is open to court to permit any party to the suit
to transfer the property to on terms which it may think fit to impose.
In Amarnath v. Deputy Director of Consolidation, AIR 1985 All 169
it was held that party is said to be party to the suit, if the decision or
judgement is likelt to affect the share of such a party and the decision
would be binding on him too. Thus A,B,C, are brother ;C is residing in a
distant town while A and B are residing together. A files a suit for
partition and does not implead C or his father X. Though X and C are
not parties to the suit, yet the subject matter of suit is the same, and
neither X nor C legally and validly transfer or alienate his share to a third
party. In such case the ultimate decree is likely to affect the shares of X
and C too. Thus, there may be case where a party may not be locked in
a civil suit or proceeding; yet such a party may be affected by the
judgment/decree is such a suit.
G. The parties of sale i.e., the seller and the purchase, must be
competent. . They must be competent to contract, they must of
sound mind and have attained the age of majority. The seller must
also have right to sell the property and purchase may be any
person not disqualified to purchase a property under any law
enforced in India.
RIGHTS OF SELLER
DUTIES OF SELLER
● Duty to disclose defects-the seller is bound to disclose to the
buyer any material defect in the property or title, of which seller is,
and buyer is not aware, and which buyer could not with ordinary
case discover.
● Where the seller retains that part of the property with him, which of
greatest value and, such property is included in the documents, the
seller is entitled to retain all the documents with him.
RIGHTS OF BUYER
DUTIES OF BUYER