SEMESTER

2
COURSE

8 - Property Laws I
BLOCK

2 - General Principles of Property Laws

UNITS

4-6
AUTHOR

Mr. Krishna Shorewala

!
!

Learning Objectives
After you go through this material, you should be able to:

Perceive the law relating to transfers to an unborn person

Understand the operation of the rule against perpetuity

Appreciate the impact of the doctrine of election and

apportionment

Understand the concepts of lis pendens and ownership

by estoppel

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

Introduction
In the previous Units of this Block, we looked at some of the
general rules governing the transfer of property. In the final three
Units of this Block we will be studying more of the principles
applicable to transfers of property including the rule against
perpetuity, the doctrine of election, the concept of lis pendens, and
ownership by estoppel. These principles arose out of common law
concepts in England but are now part of the Transfer of Property
Act, 1882 (the Transfer of Property Act).

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

Unit 4: Rule Against Perpetuities

This interest must extend to the whole of the remaining

interest of the transferor, in order to be valid.

This Unit will introduce you to yet another interesting area of law
pertaining to the transfer of property for the benefit of an unborn
person.

Although an interest for the benefit of the unborn person may be

created, such a transfer cannot be made directly. What this
essentially means is that the estate or property must vest in some

Transfer to an unborn person

As a general rule, the Transfer of Property Act deals with transfers
inter vivos. However, certain provisions deal with transfers for the

person between the date of the transfer and the coming into
existence of the unborn child. Thus, the validity of the transfer for
the benefit of the unborn person is subject to this prior interest.

benefit of unborn persons. One such important provision is

It may also be kept in mind that if the unborn child is restrained

Section 13 of the Transfer of Property Act, which provides that it is

from alienating the property absolutely, then the transfer is invalid.

possible to transfer property for the benefit of a person who is to

The illustration below will be helpful in understanding this better.

be born on a future date.

Illustration: Asha transfers a property to Bipasha for Bipashas

The requirements to be met for making a valid transfer under

lifetime, and then to Bipashas unborn first child absolutely. This

Section 13 of the Transfer of Property Act are:

transfer would be valid under Section 13 of the Transfer of

Property Act.

There should be a transfer of property.

An interest must be created for the benefit of an unborn

However, if in the same transfer, the unborn child is restrained

person, that is, a person not in existence at the time of the

from alienating the property absolutely, then the transfer fails to

transfer.

meet the final requirement of Section 13 of the Transfer of

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

Property Act, and hence, such a transfer is invalid. So let us

form, the rule in England provides that no contingent or executory

assume that after Bipashas unborn child the property is to revert

interest may be created unless it vests within the maximum period

back to Asha and her heirs. You see, such a transfer imposes a

of one or more lives in being and twenty-one years.iv

restriction on the unborn child. The unborn child may only acquire
only a life interest, and therefore, cannot transfer the property as
an owner to a third party. For this reason, the transfer would be
invalid.

The term perpetuity simply is a disposition, which makes property

inalienable for an indefinite period. Section 14 of the Transfer of
Property Act deals with this other important restriction on transfer
of property. It provides that no transfer of property can operate to

It is important to note that the term unborn person does not

create an interest that takes effect only after the lifetime of one or

include a child en ventra se mere, that is, a child in the womb.

more persons living at the date of the transfer, and the minority of

This is so because such a child is considered to be in existence.

some person who must be in existence at the expiration of that

The term extend under Section 13 of the Transfer of Property Act

period, and to whom on attaining full age, the interest created is to

is directed towards the absolute nature of the estate conferred and

belong. In other words, it provides that the property cannot be tied

not the certainty of vesting. So, the property need not be vested in

for an indefinite period. Further, the property cannot be transferred

the unborn person at birth but must be conferred within the

in an unending way. The rule is based on the considerations of

iii

requirements of the section. This is clear from the Illustration

public policy, since property cannot be made inalienable unless it

above.

is in the interest of the community.

The rule against perpetuity invalidates any bequest or inheritance

Rule against Perpetuities

that delays vesting beyond the life or lives-in-being and the

minority of the donee who must be living at the close of the last

The rule against perpetuities or the doctrine of remoteness is an

life. Simply put, property can be transferred to an unborn person

English principle relating to the transfer of property. In its modern

who has to be born at the expiration of the interest created and

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

the maximum permissible remoteness is of eighteen years, that is,

must be born. Or else, he will lose the property. If he is born

the age of majority in India.

during or prior to Stage II, Section 20 of the Transfer of Property

The purpose behind the rule against perpetuities is as follows:

There is a need to limit the time for which ownership can be split
up into present and future interests. It makes the property difficult
to sell. It also makes loans to improve the property difficult to get
as the present owner has a limited right over the property. In

Act will operate and the property will vest in him. If the transferor
wishes, the vesting may be postponed till he attains majority.
Stage IV is that of the date the ultimate transferee attains majority.
At this stage and not a second afterwards the transfer will be
allowed as the perpetuity is valid up to stage IV and not after.

addition to this, it also makes alienation of the property almost

Illustration: Akshay transfers a property to Bipasha for life and

impossible. Such a practice militates against the spirit of the

then to her unborn child on attaining 21 years of age. Here, the

legislation, which is to allow ordered but free alienation and

transfer would be bad for violating the rule against perpetuity. The

circulation of property among living persons.

transfer was valid for Bipashas life interest. Further, it vested the

An analysis of this provision may be carried out in the following

manner. Suppose there are four stages. Stage I is the lifetime of
the transferee, and at Stage II are living persons. At these two
stages, the transferor can put any conditions he wants and every
condition he wants (subject, of course, to the other provisions of

property in the unborn child absolutely. However, the property

would vest in him only on attaining 21 years of age, that is, 3
years after the age of majority. This would be bad in India where
the perpetuity period cannot extend beyond the majority of the
unborn person.

the Transfer of Property Act). He can create limited estates,

The rule against perpetuities does not restrict the creation of

interests, and transfer specific rights as he should think fit. At

successive life interests created in favour of living persons.

Stage III, however, we have the ultimate transferee. Here, is the

transferee who is an unborn person at the time of the transfer.
Now, when the time comes for the property to pass on to him, he

Illustration: In Veerattalingam v. Rameshv, where A executed a will

giving possession of her properties to her sons without the power

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

to alienate, and after that, a life interest in sons sons. The will also

characteristics or attributes. Also, it may be a body of persons

provided that after the death of the grandsons, the property had to

uncertain in number.

be transferred in favour of the great-grandsons absolutely. The

great-grandsons were unborn at the time the will was executed.
However, the Supreme Court held that the transfer of property for
successive life interests in favour of living persons was valid, and
not hit by Section 14 of the Transfer of Property Act.
Thus, we see that Sections 13 and 14 of the Transfer of Property
Act operate to curb transfer practices that would discourage the
transfer of properties subsequently. They prevent the property
from being locked and inalienable.
The next important area to consider in this regard is the manner in
which these rules operate when transfers are made to a class of
persons.

One of the earliest definitions of a class of persons was given by

Lord Selborne in Pearks v. Moseleyvi . In this case, a gift is said to
be to a class of persons when it was to all those persons within a
certain category or description defined by a general or collective
formula.
An important aspect of class transfers is that they are groupminded and fluctuate with the size of the group. The group of
persons is uncertain in number at the time of the transfer and the
share of each person is dependant on the ultimate number in the
group.vii
In relation to the rules against perpetuity and for transfers for the
benefit of unborn persons, the law relating to transfer to a class is
dealt with by Section15 of the Transfer of Property Act, which
provides that in the case of transfer to a class, if any of the

Class Transfers

members of a class are hit by the limitations enumerated in

The concept of a class is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary as a

Section 13 and Section 14, then the transfer would fail in relation

group of persons, things, qualities or activities, having common

to those people. However, it would not fail for the entire class. The

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

transfer would be valid for the remainder of the class, which does

as to Ceaser as well under Section 16 of the Transfer of

meet the requirements of Section 13 and Section 14.

Property Act.

Further, Section 16 of the Transfer of Property Act provides further

When there is an alternative gift, which is independent of the gift

that if an interest should fail entirely by the operation of Sections

hit by the rule against perpetuities or in relation to unborn persons,

13 and 14, then any interest that is created subsequent to such a

and is capable to taking effect independently, then such a gift

failed interest must also fail. Thus, by virtue of this Section, when

would be valid and not be affected by the invalidity of the other

the transfer in favour of the prior interest is bad for violating the

gift.viii

rule against perpetuity, then the interest subsequent to it also fails

and is void. It is based on the English principle that a limitation
following upon a limitation void for remoteness is itself void even
though it may not itself transgress the rule against perpetuity or
the rule relating to transfer in favour of unborn persons. It applies
to subsequent interests of both kinds those that are to take
place after the prior interest or on the failure of prior interest. Thus,

Illustration: In Tarokessur Roy v. Soshi Shukhuressar Royix, the

testator bequeaths to his three nephews his properties and a gift
to their male descendants without the power of alienation over the
property stating that if any of the nephews died without a male
child, his interest would be taken by the surviving nephews and
their male descendants. The estate failed but the gift was valid.

in both cases, if the prior interest cannot take, the claim of the
subsequent interest(s) will also fail.
Illustration: Anthony transfers property to Brutus for life and then
to Brutuss sons who attain the age of 21 years and in default of
that to Ceaser absolutely. At the time of the transfer Brutus has no
sons. In such a case, the transfer to Brutuss son fails for violating
the rule against perpetuity. Therefore, the transfer would be void
Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.
Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

Unit 5: Doctrine of Election and Apportionment

Doctrine of Election

it, then he must forgo the benefit that is conferred upon him by the
transaction. As a result of the benefit so forgone it reverts back to
the transferor or his representatives. If the owner chooses to

The Doctrine of Election is one of the most important areas of the

confirm the transfer, he may retain the benefit conferred upon him

law relating to transfer of property. Section 35 of the Transfer of

by the transaction.

Property Act deals with this doctrine. The primary element in the
doctrine of election is the presence of choice. A choice is given to
the owner of the property to either perfect an imperfect transfer
and enjoy its benefits or avoid the transfer and also forgo the
benefit. The situation in which the doctrine comes into play is set
out in Section 35 as follows:

A person professes to transfer property when that person

has no right to do so; and

However, this is subject to further conditions. If the transfer is

for consideration or, in a case where it is gratuitous, the transferor
has died or otherwise become incapable of making a fresh
transfer before the election, then the doctrines operation will be
subject to the charge of compensating the disappointed transferee
for the amount or value of the property sought to be transferred
to him.
Illustration: In Mangaldoss v. Ranchoddasx, a widow with a limited

As a part of the same transaction, that person confers any

estate over her deceased husbands property executed a will

benefit on the owner of the property.

bequeathing the property to A and a sum of Rupees Two

thousand to B. A and B were also the nearest reversioners of the
deceased husband. A reversioner is the living heir of the last

If both these facts are true in any transaction, then according to

owner entitled to succeed to the estate on the death of a widow or

the doctrine of election, the owner must elect to confirm such a

other heirs. On the death of the widow, B had a claim over half of

transfer or to dissent from it. If the owner chooses to dissent from

the property which had been bequeathed to A. According to the

doctrine of election, B would have to make a choice here. He had

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

!
!

to elect to take either the half share of the property outside of the

confirm the transaction. In that case, she will be allowed to keep

will or take the money under the will and forgo his claim over the

the benefit she derives from the transaction that is, the factory

property.

unit. However, she must then forgo the property she originally

For the doctrine of election to operate, a person must gain a

owned, which is then permanently transferred to Mulayam.

benefit directly from a transaction. That essentially implies that if a

Section 35 of the Transfer of Property Act also provides certain

person benefits indirectly, he need not elect.xi It is also essential

exceptions to the application of the doctrine of election. They are:

for the operation of the doctrine that the transferor should not have
the right to transfer the property. The principle underlying is that

the benefit and burden of a transaction must coexist. One cannot

avail of the benefit and, at the same time, also rid themselves of
the burden. However, for this to operate, both the benefit and the
burden must form part of the same transaction. The benefit and
the burden cannot be independent of each other.xii The doctrine is
best explained by way of an illustration.

When a particular benefit is expressly conferred, in lieu of

the property, on its owner by the transferor, and if such
owner elects to dissent from the transaction, then the owner
must relinquish that benefit (expressly conferred) but not
any other benefit that may be derived from the transaction.
Illustration: Thus, if Mohan sells property belonging to Sonia
to Rahul. In the sale deed, it is expressly states that in lieu

Illustration: Amar transfers to Mulayam a property that, in fact,

of the property, Sonia shall be given a gold mine. Sonia may

belongs to Maya. Also, as a part of the same transaction, Maya

elect to reclaim the property and forgo the gold mine.

receives a factory unit. Under the doctrine of election, Maya has a

However, she need not forgo any other benefit that also is

choice. She may choose to dissent from the transaction and take

conferred on her by the transaction. Now, let us assume that

back the property that is rightfully hers. However, in this case, she

the sale deed contained additionally a payment of Rupees

must then forgo the factory that was transferred to her as a part of

Two thousand to Sonia. According to the exception in

the same transaction. On the other hand, she may choose to

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.
Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

10

!
!

Section 35, Sonia can retain that amount even after

claim on the property. Subsequently, he cannot try to claim

dissenting from the transaction.

his right of election.

Election by the owner may be express or even implied.

Acceptance of a benefit with full knowledge implies an

period for such election. Waiver is inferred if the benefit is

election. So, when a person accepts the benefits under the

enjoyed for two years without any express act of dissent or if

transaction, the onerous part of the transaction is

it is impossible to restore the parties in the same condition

automatically confirmed. Once an election is made, it is final

as if the act had not been done. If a year has elapsed since

and binding and cannot be revoked unless it can be shown

the date of transfer to make the election, the transferor or

that it was made without any or with incomplete knowledge

his representative may require the owner to elect and if he

of the transaction. The Transfer of Property Act provides

does not comply with the requisition within a reasonable

that the person electing must be aware of his duty to elect

period, he will be deemed to confirm the transfer. In case of

and of those circumstances that would influence the

disability, however, the election shall be postponed until the

judgement of a reasonable man in making an election or

disability ceases, or until a competent authority makes the

waives such enquiry into circumstances.

election.

Illustration: Sahil transfers certain property to Akshay and in

Illustration: Amit transfers certain property Shamit owns to

the same instrument transfers Rupees Twenty thousand to

Rohit and, by the same instrument, transfers certain

Aditya, the real owner of the property. Aditya comes to know

properties he owns to Shamit. Shamit must now elect

of this and uses the money he receives to pay for a new

whether he wants to claim Amits property under the

television in his house. As you may have realised, by

instrument or have his own property returned. Shamit does

spending the money, he has impliedly elected to forgo his

not elect for a whole year. Amit sends him a notice asking

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

Transfer of Property Act also indirectly provides for the time

11

!
!

him to elect within a period of three months from the receipt

Illustration: Aishwarya owns a property from which a rent of

of the notice. Shamit does not reply or make an election

Rupees Thirty thousand accrues each month, payable at the last

within that period. In such a case, he will be deemed to

day of the month. Aishwarya sells the property to Katrina on the

confirm the transfer.

fifteenth day of the month. When the rent of that month is

received, Section 36 of the Transfer of Property Act allows for its
fair apportionment or distribution by presuming it to accrue on a

Apportionment

daily basis and allowing Aishwarya to receive the rent payable for

Apportionment is dealt with under Sections 36 and 37 of the

the first fifteen days that is, Rupees Fifteen thousand, and the

Transfer of Property Act. Apportionment literally means

remaining rent going to the new owner, Katrina.

distribution. Section 36 of the Transfer of Property Act deals with

apportionment by time and provides rules for the distribution of
income accruing from the property between the transferor and
the transferee on affecting the transfer. The Section provides
that unless there is a contract or local usage to the contrary, all
periodical payments in the nature of income will be deemed to
accrue on a daily basis and have to be apportioned accordingly,
upon transfer of the interest of the person entitled to receive them.
The amount is payable on the days appointed for the payment
thereof. The illustration below may help us in understanding
this better.

The rule of apportionment only applies to transfers within the

meaning of Section 5 of the Transfer of Property Act and not to
transfers excluded under Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act.
As we have discussed earlier in Block 2, Section 6 prohibits
certain kinds of transfers absolutely. Therefore, it does not apply
to court sales or joint family property.xiv It may also be excluded by
a contract to the contrary dispensing with the rule of
apportionment. The rule can also be excluded by the operation of
a local usage that provides to the contrary.
While Section 36 of the Transfer of Property Act deals with
apportionment by time, Section 37 of the Transfer of Property Act
deals with the apportionment by estate. It applies in a situation

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

12

!
!

where, on a transfer, a property is divided and held in several

of them would be liable here to pay Rupees Two thousand every

shares. The benefit of any obligation from such division passes

year to fulfil the condition on which the transfer is made.

from one to several owners. In such a scenario the corresponding

duty must be performed in favour of each of the transferees in
proportion to the value of their share in the property provided that
the duty can be severed. It is important to note that such
severance of duty must not increase the onus of the obligation.
However, if the onus does increase or severance is not possible,

Under Section 37 of the Transfer of Property Act, therefore, when

the lessor transfers leased property to several persons, the tenant
is obligated to pay rent not just to one of them or to all of them in
equal shares, but must pay each in proportion to his contribution
to the property.

then the duty shall be performed for the benefit of one of such

Illustration: Four brothers, Varun, Vinay, Vikram, and Vishesh

several owners as they shall jointly designate for the purpose.

jointly purchase a house for Rupees Twenty five lakhs. Varun

transferor or the transferee can give the notice with regard to the

pays Rupees Ten lakhs and the rest pay Rupees Five lakhs each

severance.xv A person should have notice of the severance to be

for the purchase. The house is leased to Akram for Rupees Ten

answerable for failing to discharge the burden of the obligation.

thousand. By the operation of Section 37, Akram will be obligated

Agricultural leases are exempted from this rule unless applied by

to pay Rupees Four thousand to Varun and Rupees Two

xvi

the State Government in the Official Gazette.

thousand to each of the other three brothers.

Illustration: Amar transfers a property to Akshay, Amit, and Aruj in

With this we conclude our discussion on the doctrine of election

equal portions. The property comes with a condition that a yearly

and the rules relating to apportionment. The final Unit in this Block

maintenance of Rupees Six thousand should be paid to Amars

relates to two important principles: the transfer of ownership by

sister, Akshaya. Here, just as Akshay, Amit, and Aruj are entitled

estoppel and lis pendens.

to the benefits of the property, they will also be obligated to the

same extent to the obligations under the property. Therefore, each
Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.
Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

13

!
!

Unit 6: Lis Pendens and Ownership by Estoppel

dispute so as to affect his opponent. This is based on the English

common law maxim ut lite pendente nihil innovatur, which means

Lis pendens

that no new rights may be introduced during litigation. As you may

The doctrine of lis pendens is embodied in Section 52 of the

have realised the basis for this doctrine is that it would be

Transfer of Property Act. The term lis means action or suit, and

impossible to terminate suits successfully if alienation pendente

the term pendens means continuing or pending. The phrase lis

lit, that is, alienation during the pendency of the suit was

pendens maybe described as the jurisdiction, power, or control

allowed. The defendant would regularly be able to defeat the

that courts have during the pendency of an action over the

plaintiffs cause by alienating the property.xviii It is one of the most

property involved.xvii

important rules of common law and applies by virtue of the

Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act provides that any

immovable property, which is the subject matter of a suit, should

principles of justice, equity, and good conscience to transactions

to which the Transfer of Property Act does not apply.xix

not be transferred to any third party during the pendency of the

For the doctrine of lis pendens to apply, Section 52 of the Transfer

suit. A suit is deemed to commence from the date when the plaint

of Property Act requires the following conditions to be fulfilled:

is presented or the proceedings are instituted in a court of

competent jurisdiction. It is said to continue till the suit has been

jurisdiction;

disposed off by a final decree or the suit is barred by limitation

under the law in force at the time. Agreeably, the transferee is

A litigation should be pending in a court of competent

The suit must relate to a specific immovable property;

transferred during the pendency of the suit.

The suit should relate to a right in that property;

The doctrine may be stated as follows: during the pendency of the

The suit should not be collusive or bogus; and

bound by the result of the suit in a case when such property is

suit, neither party to the litigation can alienate the property in

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.
Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

14

!
!

The property should not be transferred or otherwise dealt

conspiracy. Two parties may collude together and file a bogus suit

with by any of the parties to the suit so as to affect the

in the Court for their personal benefit. When the suit is tainted with

rights of any of the other party to the suit till the final

fraud, it is regarded as a collusive suit.xx

disposal of the suit unless authorised by the court and on

such terms as it may impose.

Illustration: Akshay agrees to sell his house to Vinay and takes an

advance amount of Rupees One lakh from him. They agree that if
Vinay fails to pay the remaining amount within thirty days, then he

The provision was extensively amended in 1929 to resolve a

number of controversies that had cropped up since its inception.
The Explanation defining the term pendency was added.
Pendency is the primary requirement for invoking the doctrine of
lis pendens and the Explanation helps add certainty to the ambit
of the term. According to the Explanation, and as mentioned
above a suit or proceeding commences on presenting the plaint or
instituting the proceedings and continues till a final decree or order
has been passed by the court or the suit is barred by limitation
under the laws in force at the time.
Further, the suit should not be collusive. The term collusive was
also added to the provision by Section 52 of the Transfer of
Property Act by the 1929 Amendment. A suit is said to be
collusive when it is a sham suit, a pretentious suit or one filled with

will forfeit the advance. Further, if Akshay fails to execute the

transfer within the same time, he will have to pay three times the
advance amount that is, Rupees Three lakhs to Vinay as
damages. During the thirty days, Akshay changes his mind about
selling the house. However, he does not wish to pay the damages
either. Therefore, he and his best friend Anish collude and Anish
files a suit against Akshay for recovery of dues owed to him and
seeks to recover the amount from the house that would have been
sold to Vinay. Here, even if there is a charge over the house, the
doctrine of lis pendens would not be attracted, since it is a
collusive suit and not a genuine one.
The doctrine of lis pendens, as it is found in Section 52 of the
Transfer of Property Act, applies in very specific instances only.
For instance, it is only applicable in suits relating to immoveable
property. Movable property is not included within this doctrine. The

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

15

!
!

doctrine continues to apply even when a decree is passed but an

appeal is filed.

xxi

pendente lite is made? The restriction under Section 52 of the

Transfer of Property Act operates on the parties to the litigation,

It also continues to operate till the stage of the execution of the

decree.xxii Even a civil appeal, which is preferred to the Supreme
Court in pursuance of a grant of special leave under Article 136 of
the Constitution of India, the doctrine of lis pendens continues to
apply to the suit property.xxiii
Illustration: In Dalip Ram v. Jeewan Ram, the plaintiff had filed a
suit for possession of a land that was sold to the defendant. The
lower court granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff in pursuance
of which, he took possession of the property. The defendant
appealed to the High Court but it was dismissed. Thereafter, he
filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. The court granted
accepted the appeal. But during the period of this appeal, the
plaintiff had sold the property to another who resisted a decree of
restitution. The court held that the doctrine of lis pendens applied

that is, the transferor and not the third party transferee as such. As
we noted above, the transferee gets whatever rights or title the
transferor had at the time of the sale. Therefore, a transfer
pendente lite is not void, but only dependent on the outcome of
the litigation.
Illustration: Once again, take the case of Dalip Ram v. Jeewan
Ram discussed in the previous illustration. There, when the
plaintiff in the original suit transferred the property to a third party,
the transfer was valid. Its validity was not disputed. However, it
was subject to the outcome of the litigation. Therefore, when the
Supreme Court allowed the appeal, then the transferee would be
bound by it under the doctrine of lis pendens. Similarly, had the
Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, the third party would be
entitled to undisturbed enjoyment of the property transferred.

and this was a sale, which was pending disposal of a case before

The Section does not annul the conveyance but only makes it

the Supreme Court.

subject to the determination of the rights of the parties by

An important question for consideration here is: what is the effect

of the violation of the doctrine? What happens if a transfer

decree.xxvi In terms of the litigation itself, the conveyance will be

treated as non est or invalid and the transferor shall be regarded
as the owner of the property notwithstanding the transfer.

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

16

!
!

Ownership by Estoppel
Estoppel is a principle in equity where, in certain cases, if a
person makes an assertion to another and then the other acts on
it, then that person can be estopped from denying that assertion.
Illustration: Akshay promises to buy a large quantity of garments
that Amar produces. Although no formal contract is made, Amar
starts procuring the raw materials required to meet the production

Illustration: if X sells two properties, A and B, to Y. However, X is

not authorised to sell B as it belongs to his father, Z. Now, on the
death of Z, when X inherits the property B, Y may ask X to deliver
B, if he has not rescinded the contract until then.
For Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act to apply, the
following conditions must be fulfilled:

requirements and incurs expenditures thereof. Subsequently,

The transferor should make a fraudulent or erroneous

representation of authority to transfer;

Akshay may be estopped in equity from going back on his promise

The transferee should act on that representation;

contract.

The transfer must not be prohibited by the law; and

Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act deals with the role of

Subsequently, while the contract subsists, the transferor

and will be required to abide by it even in the absence of a formal

estoppel in the transfer of property. It provides that where a

should acquire an interest in that property

person fraudulently or erroneously represents that he is

authorised to transfer certain immovable property and professes
to transfer it for consideration, the transferee shall have the option

If all these conditions are fulfilled, then the transferee can exercise

to allow the transfer to operate on any interest the transferor

the option to obtain the interest so acquired by the transferor.

acquires in such property at any time during the subsistence of the

However, if the contract is rescinded, then no such option shall

contract.

exist.

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

17

!
!

Conclusion
With this, we conclude our discussion on the doctrines of lis
pendens and estoppel. Also, this ends our discussion on the
general principles of Property Law. As discussed earlier, these
principles apply to all transfers and are meant to facilitate transfers
in various ways and forms and curb practices that restrict the
transfer of property. In the next Block, we shall be looking at
specific forms of transfer of property and rules relating thereto.
-x-x-

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

18

!
!

Suggested Reading
Books

Justice Ramanujam (ed.), G.C.V. Subbaraos Transfer of

Property Act, 15th ed., C. Subbiah Chetty & Co, Chennai,
2005.

Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Property Law, 2nd ed.,

LexisNexis Butterworths, New Delhi, 2011.

S.M. Lahiri, The Transfer of Property Act (Act IV of 1882),

11th ed., India Law House, New Delhi, 2001.

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

19

!
!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
iii

Framroze v. Tehmina, AIR 1948 Bom 188.

In re Ridley (1879) 11 Ch.D. 645.
v
(1991) 1 SCC 489.
vi
(1880) 5 App. Casw. 714.
vii
Bryan A. Garner (Ed.), Blacks Law Dictionary, 8th ed., Thomson West, 2007, St.
Paul, at p. 709.
viii
Re Davy [1915] 1 Ch. 837.
ix
(1883) ILR 9 Cal 952, as cited in Halsburys Laws of India 103 (12) Property and
Easements, Lexis Nexis Butterworths, New Delhi, 2002).
x
Mangaldoss v. Ranchoddas, 14 Bom. 438.
xi
Ramayyar v. Mahalakshmi, AIR 1922 Mad 357.
xii
Dahnpatti v. Devi Prasad, (1970) 3 SCC 779.
xiv
See Subbaraju v. Seethamaraju, (1916) ILR 39 Mad 283; Manmad Kunhi v.
Ibrayani Haji, AIR 1959 Ker 208.
xv
Peary Lal v. Madhoji, (1913) 17 Cal LJ 372.
xvi
Also see Alimuddin v. Hiralal, (1896) ILR 23 Cal 87.
xvii
See Govinda Pillai v. Aiyappan Krishnan, AIR 1975 Ker 10.
xviii
See Bellamy v. Sabine, (1857) 1 De G&J 566.
xix
Lou Raj Kumar v. Daya Shanker, AIR 1986 Del 364.
xx
See Annamalai v. Mayayandi, (1906) ILR 29 Mad 426.
xxi
Purshottam v. Bai Moti, AIR 1963 Guj 30.
xxii
Ammayi v. Sitaramayya, AIR 1925 Mad 1039.
xxiii
See Dalip Kumar v. Jeewan Ram, AIR 1996 P&H 158.
xxvi
Liladhar v. Shivaji, AIR 1936 Nag 125.
iv

Rainmaker Training & Recruitment Private Limited, 2011.

Any unauthorised use or reproduction of this material shall attract all applicable civil and criminal law remedies.

20