top of page

TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT (landmark Judgement)

Updated: May 4

TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT (landmark Judgement)
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT (landmark Judgement)



Shanti Bai v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 532

If the intention of the owner regarding a tree is to maintain its life, it falls under the category of a tree; however, if the intention is to eventually cut it for timber purposes, it is classified as standing timber (movable).

Municipal Corporation Bombay v. Lala Pancham, AIR 1965 SC 1008

Rights stemming from leases or tenancies are considered immovable property.

Santosh Jaiswal v. State of M.P., AIR 1996 SC 207

The right to fishery is deemed immovable property.

Mahadev v. State of Bombay AIR 1959 SC

Entitlements such as the right to gather forest produce, like tendu leaves, and soil for brick-making are categorised as immovable property.

Jugal Kishore Saraf v. Raw Cotton Co. Ltd, AIR 1955 SC 376

A decree specifying a future decree does not constitute an actionable claim.

Ram Niwas v. Bano, AIR 2000 SC 2921

The doctrine of constructive notice applies when the plaintiff holds actual possession of the property. The term 'notice' encompasses a broader scope than 'knowledge'.

Daya Devi v. Chapla Devi, AIR 1960 Cal. 378

Outstanding rent arrears are considered an actionable claim.



V.N. Sarin v. Ajeet Kumar, AIR 1966 SC 432

Partition does not constitute a transfer of property.

Muhammad Raza v. Abbas Bandi Bibi, AIR 1932 P.C. 158

A condition that limits the transferee from transferring the property to individuals outside the transferor's family is considered a partial restraint, which is valid and enforceable.

Girijesh Dutta v. Data Din, AIR 1934 Oudh 35

Under Section 16, in a property transfer for the benefit of a person or class of persons, if prior interests fail under Section 13 or 14, subsequent interests created in the same transaction also fail. If there are two successive interests created, the later one is subject to the validity of the former.

Tulk v. Moxhay (1848)41 E.R. 1143

Covenants refer to written agreements or contracts concerning property.

Jaya Dayal Poddar v. Bibi Hazara, AIR 1974 SC 171

The determination of whether a person qualifies as an ostensible owner depends on the specific facts and circumstances of the case, as it is a subjective matter, as held by the Supreme Court.

Musahur Sahu v. Hakimlal, (1950)43 Cal. 521

In the presence of multiple creditors, a transfer in favour of one of them does not constitute a fraudulent transfer.

Prabodh Kumar Das v. Dantamara Tea Co. Ltd, AIR 1940 P.C.L

Section 53-A serves as a 'shield' and not as a 'sword' or a tool for attack.


Pandit Chunchun Jha v. Sheikh Ibadat Ali AIR 1954 SC 345

The Supreme Court ruled that if the condition of repurchase is not explicitly stated in the mortgage document, the transaction cannot be classified as a mortgage.

Kreglinger v. New Patagonia Meat & Cold Storage Comp. Ltd, (1914) AC. 25

A collateral benefit refers to an advantage beyond the mortgage principal and interest. Such a benefit to the mortgagee does not inherently impede redemption; it only constitutes a 'clog' when it is both unfair and unconscionable and forms part of the mortgage transaction, rather than being an independent benefit.

Anand Behra v. State of Orissa, AIR 1956 SC 17

The right to fish in Chilka Lake over a specified period was deemed a benefit derived from the land.

Ram Bhawan Singh v. Jagdish, (1990) 4 SCC 309 

When a person with a limited interest in a property transfers a larger interest to a transferee under the representation that they possess that larger interest, and subsequently acquires the larger interest, the transferee has the option to claim that larger interest.

Kartar Singh v. Harbans Kaur, (1994) 4 SCC 730

A transferee cannot obtain a valid title if they have actual or constructive knowledge of defects in the transferor's title. Section 43 imposes a duty on the transferee to exercise care in such situations.

Whitby v. Mitchell (1890) 4 Ch. D. 85 

The principle against double possibilities was acknowledged, permitting the granting of a life interest to an unborn individual but disallowing the extension of such interest to the descendants of said unborn person.

Jayaram Mudaliar v. Ayyaswami, AIR 1973 SC 569

The private sale of property by the Karta during pending partition litigation is invalidated by Section 52 and does not bind the family.

Prahlad Pradhan v. Sonu Kumhar, (2019) 10 SCC 259

A person can only transfer a right, title, or interest in tangible property that they possess, whether for consideration or otherwise. If it's proven that the seller lacked substantial right, title, or interest in the property at the time of transfer, the buyer will not acquire any rights. Such a transfer would be deemed illegal and void.

Sridhar v. N. Revanna, (2020) 11 SCC 221

For Section 13 to apply, the transfer in question must aim to establish an interest for the benefit of an unborn person.

Dahiben v. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali, (2020) 7 SCC 366

Full payment of the sale price at the time of executing the sale deed isn't an essential condition for completing the sale. The sale deed can be registered even with partial payment, transferring title to the transferee.

Failure to pay the remaining balance does not invalidate the sale, thus cancellation of the sale deed due to nonpayment of the balance cannot be pursued.

Siri Chand v. Surinder Singh, (2020) 6 SCC 288

In determining the nature of a lease, if no specific tenancy period is mentioned in the deed, the true nature of the deed must be discerned from other conditions and the intentions of the parties involved.


Nand Ram v. Jagdish Prasad, (2020) 9 SCC 393

When a lessee remains in possession after the lease term expires without the lessor's consent, the lessee's status shifts to that of a tenant at sufferance, rendering their possession unlawful and akin to trespassing.

However, recovery of possession can only be pursued by the lessor through legal means. By legal fiction, the lessee's possession is deemed permissive, and it cannot be considered adverse to the lessor's title.

Prakash (Dead) By LR. v. G. Aradhya & Ors (2023)

Under Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act,1882 no transaction shall be deemed to be a mortgage unless the condition for reconveyance is contained in the document which purports to effect the sale.

Shivashankara v. H,P. Vedavyasa Char (2023)

The principle of "lis pendens" is based on "justice, equity and good conscience" and the same will apply even in a case where the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act is not applicable in the strict sense.

Transfer of possession pendente lite will also be transfer of property within the meaning of Section 52 and, therefore, the import of Section 52 of the TP Act is that if there is any transfer of right in immovable property during the pendency of a suit such transfer will be non est in the eye of law if it will adversely affect the interest of the other party to the suit in the property concerned.


2 views0 comments


bottom of page