GENERAL RULES AND DOCTRINES REGARDING TRANFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 - A JURISTS GLOBAL STUDY

INTRODCTION:

One important piece of Indian law that regulates the transfer of property between living people is the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Although its main focus is on immovable property, it offers a legal framework for the transfer of both movable and immovable property.

The Act guarantees that the process is carried out in a fair and open manner by outlining the general guidelines that must be followed when transferring property. We will examine the main ideas of the Transfer of Property Act in this article.

The term "transfer of property" is defined in Section 5 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. This section defines a transfer of property as an act whereby a living person transfers property to one or more other living people, or to himself and other living people, either now or in the future.

IMPORTANCE OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882

One of the main pillars of Indian property law is the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which establishes a framework for the legal transfer of property between living people. Clarity, equity, and transparency in real estate transactions are guaranteed by the broad guidelines established in the Act. They set the legal framework for property transferability, alienation prohibitions, and the responsibilities and rights of parties to property transfers.

These guidelines are essential for preserving predictability and order in real estate transactions. By guaranteeing that property rights are respected and maintained, they safeguard the interests of both the transferor and the transferee. Property transactions can lead to disputes and legal complications, which are avoided by the Act's provisions on topics like the doctrine of lis pendens, conditional transfers, and the rule against perpetuity.

Furthermore, by enabling the seamless transfer of property—a prerequisite for investment and expansion in the real estate industry the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, significantly contributes to India's economic development. The tenets of the Act offer a safe and legal setting for real estate transactions, promoting investment and bolstering the stability and prosperity.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882

The general principles of the Transfer of property Act, 1882 are:

ACTIONABLE CLAIMS (SECTION 3)

A debt or claim that can be the subject of a lawsuit for comfort or relief is referred to as an actionable claim. Regardless of whether the claims are conditional, accruing, or otherwise, civil courts are acknowledged for providing grounds for relief. Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 defines the actionable claim. An actionable claim is, broadly speaking, a debt or claim for which the individual may file a lawsuit in order to recover the debt or claim.

Chairs and bicycles are examples of tangible or touchable movables that have a physical existence and can be owned. A claim involving some movable property can be taken to court. Additionally, it is a claim for any beneficial interest in the movable property as well as any unsecured debt, and the property is not in any form of possession.

For instance, X is someone who needs money or a loan from Y. After that, X borrows $50,000 from Y. Y doesn't take any security either. It indicates that X borrows $50,000 from Y without providing any collateral. Therefore, the claim or debt made by Y is actionable. And if X fails to pay back the money, Y may take the matter to court.

Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act states that a claim to any debt that is not backed by a mortgage, pledge, or hypothecation is an actionable claim. Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act does not apply to mortgages of real estate, and hypothecation or pledge of movable property is not a claim that can be pursued. The Transfer of Property Act permits the transfer of an actionable claim. Chapter 8 of the Transfer of Property Act governs the transfer of actionable claims. Sections 130 to 137 are covered in the final chapter of the Transfer of Property Act, which is Chapter 8.

TRANSFERABILITY OF PROPERTY (SECTION 6)

Any property that can be lawfully assigned or transferred from one individual to another is referred to as transferable property. A sale, gift, or exchange are just a few of the legal ways that this transfer can take place. The majority of property types may be transferred under Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, with some restrictions and exclusions.

Types of Transferable Property:

Real Estate

Movable Assets

Intellectual Property

Financial Instruments

Non- Transferable Property

Assets that cannot be lawfully transferred because of particular limitations listed in Section 6 and its subclauses are referred to as non-transferable property. In order to maintain their intended use or nature, these limitations make sure that some properties, which have special or sentimental value, are not transferable.

Key Provision of Section 6 of Transfer of Property Act of Transferable and Non- Transferable Property

A number of property types that are not transferable are listed in Section 6. These consist of: Spes Successionis: It is impossible to transfer the likelihood that an heir apparent will inherit an estate. Section 6(a) of the Act addresses this idea, which is referred to as "spes successionis."

Personal Rights: It is not possible to transfer rights that are fundamentally unique to a person, such as skills and abilities.

Future Maintenance: No right to future maintenance, regardless of how it was established, can be transferred.

Mere Right to Sue: The mere right to file a lawsuit is not transferable. This implies that one cannot give someone else the ability to file a lawsuit.

Public Office: It is not possible to transfer a public office or the salary that goes along with it, either before or after it becomes due.

Stipends to Air Force, Navy, and Military Personnel: Air Force, Navy, and military personnel are not eligible to receive stipends that are transferable.

Section 6: What may be Transferred?

According to Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, any type of property may be transferred, unless this Act or any other currently enacted law specifies otherwise. The section goes on to list a number of exceptions, which we will go into more detail about in its subsections.

Sub- Section (a): Transfer of Spes Successionis

Sub- Section (b): Right of Re- Entry

Sub- Section (c): Easement

Sub- Section (d): Restricted Interests

Sub- Section (dd): Right to Future Maintenance

Sub- Section (e): Mere Right to Sue

Sub- Section (f): Public Office

Sub- Section (g): Pensions

Sub- Section (h): Nature of Interests

Sub- Section (i): Statutory Provisions on the Transfer of Interest

RESTRAINTS ON ALIENATION (SECTION 10)

Transferring property from one individual to another is known as alienation. This transfer may occur through mortgages, sales, or gifts. Hindu law states that without the consent of every family member, no one in a joint Hindu family—not even the head, or Karta—can completely transfer the joint family's assets or their own portion of them.

Sections 10 through 18 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 describe the conditions prohibiting alienation in property transfers. According to Section 10, a condition imposed at the time of the transfer that completely forbids the recipient from giving the property to another person is nullified. The initial transfer from the giver to the recipient is still legitimate, though.

For example, it is void if A gives property to B with the stipulation that B cannot give it to anyone else while A is still living. People often call it the "rule against alienability." Conditions that limit property transfers are contrary to the Transfer of Property Act's intent, which is to enable the free transfer of property.

Condition Restraining Alienation

A condition or limitation that completely prevents the transferee or anyone claiming under him from giving up or disposing of his interest in the property is null and void, with the exception of a lease where the condition is for the benefit of the lessor or those claiming under him. This is because property may be transferred to or for the benefit of a woman (who is not a Buddhist, Muslim, or Hindu) so that she will not be able to transfer or charge the property or her beneficial interest in it during her marriage.

Note that the only conditions that are null and void are those that impose "absolute restriction." Partial restrictions on the transfer of property are permitted under certain circumstances. A condition's content, not just its language, must be taken into account in order to determine whether it is absolute or partial. As a result, there are two types of restraints.

TRANSFER TO AN UNBORN PERSON (SECTION 13)

The Transfer of Property Act's Section 13 is crucial because it specifies the circumstances in which property may be transferred for an unborn person's benefit. According to the section, "When an interest in property is created for the benefit of someone who was not yet alive on the date of the transfer, subject to an existing interest created by the same transfer, the interest won't take effect unless it covers the entirety of the transferor's remaining interest in the property."

Think about a situation in which property owner A gives it to B in trust. According to the terms of the trust, A and his intended wife will receive the property in turn for the duration of their lives. The eldest son of the intended marriage will benefit from the property for the duration of his life after the survivor's death, after which it will pass to A's second son. Since it does not cover all of the remaining interest in the property, the interest established for the eldest son in this instance does not take effect.

To put it simply, A gives B property in trust for A and A's intended wife, one after the other, for the duration of their lives. It was to be given to the eldest son of the planned marriage for life after their deaths, and then to A's second son after his passing. But since it doesn't cover all of the remaining interest in the property, the interest for the eldest son's benefit is void.

Preventing the restriction of property disposition across several generations is the main idea behind Section 13. This implies that whoever is selling property shouldn't put any restrictions on it that would prevent future generations from freely disposing of it.

RULE AGAINST PERPETUITY (SECTION 14)

Property is not permanently bound by the rule against perpetuity. According to this rule, no property may be transferred in a way that creates an interest that lasts longer than the lives of one or more living people plus a minority period.

This rule's objective is to allow the property to circulate freely for:

To keep the property from being permanently bound; to improve trade and commerce; and to improve the property itself. defending the property owner's interests; otherwise, even in an emergency, he won't be able to get rid of the property.

Public policy is the fundamental tenet upon which this regulation is based. All of the world's properties would have been immobile and useless to the economy as a whole if this prohibition against perpetuity hadn't been in place.

Conditions Necessary:

1. Property is being alienated.

2. An unborn child will benefit from the transfer, which gives him complete interest.

3. The life or limited interest of living individuals heralds the transfer of interest to the beneficiary.

4. The unborn individual for whom the transfer is made must be born before the last surviving individual passed away.

5. The grant of interest to the beneficiary may only be delayed for the duration of the beneficiary's minority and the life of the surviving person.

VESTED AND CONTINGENT INTERESTS (SECTION 19 & 21)

Vested Interest

Vested interest is discussed in Section 19 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882. It is an interest created in a person's favour where a specific event must occur and the time is not specified. The vested interest holder does not actually possess the property; rather, they anticipate doing so when a specific event occurs.

Example: When B reaches the age of 21, A agrees to give him his property. Until he is 21 years old and takes possession of A's property, B will have a vested interest in it.

Following his death, the interest will pass to his legal heirs, and the person (promise) holding it will no longer have any rights over the property.

In the aforementioned scenario, if B passes away at the age of 20, the interest in B will be transferred to B's legal heirs, who will also be granted possession of the property within the specified time frame.

Below is a detailed list of all the previously mentioned significant facets of a vested interest: 1. Interest should be vested: This fundamental principle states that when a time frame is not given or a requirement that a specific event occur is given, interest should be established in the person's favor. For this interest to be established, someone must declare that they are transferring a specific piece of property.

2. Right to enjoy property is postponed: When someone has an interest in property, they do not immediately obtain possession of it and are therefore unable to enjoy it. However, a guardian who is not a major only has the right to the vested interest once he reaches majority.

As an illustration, X consents to give Y the property "O" and directs his guardian Z to do so once he turns 20. When Y reaches the age of 18, which is the age of majority, he acquires vested interest.

Contingent Interest

The Transfer of Property Act of 1882 discusses contingent interest in Section 21. It is an interest that is generated in a person's favour upon meeting a requirement that a certain uncertain event occur. The owner of the contingent interest does not actually possess the property; rather, they receive it when the event occurs, but they will not be entitled to it if it does not. The condition placed on the transfer determines contingent interest in its entirety.

For instance, A consents to give B the car "X" in exchange for B receiving an 80 percent grade on his tests. Because this condition is dependent on whether the event occurs or not, B here obtains a contingent interest in the vehicle "X." Only if he receives 80% and the condition is met will he be granted the property.

In Leake v. Robinson (2), the court maintained that a transfer involving a contingent interest can be inferred when a condition includes an event that is to be given "at" a specific age, "upon attaining" a specific age, or "after" attaining this specific age.

The Transfer of Property Act outlines conditions for contingent interest in transfers. Section 22 states that a transfer to a group or class with a contingent interest occurs after an uncertain event, while Section 23 deals with transfers after an uncertain event. Section 24 states that a transfer to a group or class with a contingent interest occurs on a specified date, and legal heirs cannot claim an interest based on the fulfilment of the condition.

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER (SECTION 25)

Transfers of property that are contingent on the satisfaction of a condition are known as conditional transfers. The transfer might be deemed null and void if the requirement is not fulfilled.

Transferring properties with a condition that makes the existence of a right contingent on something happening or not is known as a conditional transfer. Depending on the type of condition included, the transfer's legal impact may change. Precedent, subsequent, and collateral conditions are the three different categories of conditions. Section 25 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 must be met by each of these circumstances. According to Section 25 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a transfer is considered conditional if it takes place after the other party satisfies a requirement. For example, if B is chosen for a job, A consents to give B his property. One example of a condition is the one that A places on B in order for B to obtain employment.

The following conditions must not be met for a conditional transfer to be considered valid:

·???????? Forbidden by law,

·???????? Fraudulent acts shouldn't be a part of it.

·???????? Nothing that is impossible should be done.

·???????? An act shouldn't be considered a violation of public policy.

·???????? Any action that causes harm to a person or his property shouldn't be considered immoral.

For instance, if X gives Y property "B" with the proviso that Y kills Z, the transfer is null and void because the condition is illegal.

DOCTRINE OF PRIORITY (SECTION 48)

Based on the adage "Qui prior est tempore potior est jure" (He who is first in time is stronger in law), this principle states that when the same property is transferred more than once, the rights of the previous transferee take precedence over those of the subsequent transferee.

Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 (TPA) governs the idea of priority. This theory aids the court in deciding which party's rights must take precedence over the other when there are competing interests. When the property transferor later deals with the same property with two different individuals, this idea becomes necessary. The issue facing the courts is thus essentially settled.

The idea of natural justice states that if two people's rights are established at different times, the person who has the advantage in time should likewise have the advantage in law. However, only in cases where the conflicting equities are otherwise equal does this rule apply.

The fundamental idea behind Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 is that no one can transfer a title that is greater than what they currently possess. A person who has already given property cannot take it back and handle it without the rights established by the initial transaction. The provisions of Section 48 are absolute; a subsequent transferee who is aware of the previous transfer is not protected or given any reservations.

The key components of the doctrine of priority are as follows:

·???????? There should be a single owner or transferor and multiple transferees for the property.

·???????? Only immovable real property is covered by it.

·???????? The transfer ought to be carried out at different times, and in each of these cases.

·???????? It is not possible to exercise this right in its entirety at once.

?

TRANSFER BY OSTENSIBLE OWNER (SECTION 41)

The transfer of property to a person who seems to be the owner is covered by Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. According to this, a person is deemed the "ostensible owner" of a specific piece of immovable property when they act with the express or tacit consent of the person who seems to be the property's owner.

The general rule of "Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet," which states that a person cannot transfer a better title to property than what they currently own, is subject to an exception introduced in Section 41. A commonly recognized exception to this rule is Section 41. For example, a third party who deals with the ostensible owner in good faith and after carrying out the necessary investigation may obtain a valid title to the property, even against the real owner, if the real owner reasonably entrusts the property's title documents to that person and creates an ostensible owner.

Anything that seems real or true is referred to as "ostensible." An ostensible owner is a person who poses to third parties as the rightful owner of a property, even though they are not the true owner, in the context of property ownership.

With the actual owner's express or tacit approval, the ostensible owner acquires all of the property's rights. It is crucial to remember that the ostensible owner is the full owner of the property without the required qualifications, whereas the real owner is the qualified owner.

During transactions, an ostensible owner—who is not the true owner—may pretend to be the owner. This right is obtained by the deliberate neglect or compliance of the true owner, which permits the existence of the ostensible owner. A universally applicable natural equity rule serves as the foundation for the idea of assigning an apparent owner.

ESTOPPEL (SECTION 43)

A person cannot deny the veracity of a statement made in the past if it has been relied upon by another person, according to the principle of estoppel. When it comes to property transfers, if someone makes a false representation that they have the power to transfer property and the transferee acts on that representation, the person may be prevented from denying that power.

Section 43: Transfer by an unauthorized individual who later becomes the owner of the transferred property. When someone falsely or fraudulently claims to be authorized to transfer certain immovable property and then proceeds to do so in exchange for payment, the transferee may choose to use any interest the transferor may have in the property at any point while the transfer agreement is in effect.

The right of transferees to be considered in good faith without being informed of the existence of the aforementioned option shall not be affected by anything in this section. Example: After being split up from his father B, A, a Hindu, sells his three fields, X, Y, and Z, to C. Although he claimed to have control over all three fields, Z was actually outside of his purview because he had lost it when B was divided. Since he was B's heir, A inherits the property Z after B passes away. Since Z hasn't broken the agreement, he is free to purchase property Z from A, and A is unable to refuse him.

A property cannot be transferred by someone who has no authority or interest in it. If he does, the transfer will be deemed to have been made by an unauthorized individual. Since he will be prevented from retracting his earlier statement, he cannot refuse to transfer the property to the person he falsely or fraudulently promised to transfer it to when he acquires it. Additionally, once he has the property, he must transfer it to the person he promised to transfer it to. Two guiding principles form the basis of Section 43:

1. Estoppel under English Common Law.

2. The Principle of Equity, which says that if someone promises to do something beyond his capabilities, he must do it as soon as he is able to.

Nobody has the authority to transfer property that is out of their control, and they shouldn't consent to transfer any interest in it if they don't have the authority. Creating a grant is the process of transferring an interest in land. He shouldn't have made a grant for that property when he lacked the authority to make such a transfer. How can he revoke his previously made grant if he gains control of that property? He will not be able to take back what he previously granted because neither equity nor common law allow him to do so. Because he created his own prior grant by misrepresenting his rights, it is therefore impossible to stop the transfer of property. The estoppel will be supported by his prior grant. Estoppel is a common law principle in England that supports the grant.

A rule of evidence known as estoppel forbids someone from retracting a statement they have made that contradicts their own. However, the relationship between the transferor (both before and after he obtains the right to transfer) and the transferee for value without notice is depicted in the Transfer of Property Act.

The equity principle also serves as the foundation for the legislation outlined in section 43. According to equity, a person must fulfill a promise they made in the past that exceeds their capacity when they are able to do so in the future. In terms of maxim-equity, this is the best example of what should be done. A transferor commits an unfair act against the transferee when he promises to transfer property that is not under his control. Equity requires him to give the promised property to the transferee as soon as he gains authority. For a full transfer, however, another conveyance is required.

DOCTRINE OF LIS PENDENS (SECTION 52)

The Doctrine of Lis Pendens, derived from Latin, is a legal principle in India that protects the rights and interests of parties involved in a pending lawsuit concerning immovable property. It refers to the legal authority a court holds over the property until a final judgment is reached. The doctrine prevents the subject matter from being transferred to a third party while the case is still pending.

Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act of 1882 provides a legal framework for property transfers pending a suit or proceeding in a court. The act states that property cannot be transferred or dealt with without the court's authority and terms. This includes cases where the court grants explicit permission or has collusion elements. Exceptions include lawsuits seeking debt compensation or recovery of personal property.

The principle of lis pendens is crucial because it forbids the transfer of ownership of any contested property without the approval of the court. If alienations are allowed to prevail and covenants are not imposed, the litigation may go on indefinitely and it will be impossible to successfully end the case.

Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act prevents parties from being deprived of their interests by opposing parties in unresolved lawsuits. It is based on principles of equity and fairness. The application of Section 52 requires the explicit involvement of property rights in the dispute, and the lawsuit must be pursued in good faith and filed in a court with the requisite jurisdiction.

The doctrine of Lis Pendens is not automatic when a lawsuit involving immovable property is initiated. Key conditions include a pending suit or proceeding, not being a result of collusion, and no party can transfer or deal with the property without court authorization. In the case of Balwant Singh v. Buta Ram, the court held that if these conditions are met, the doctrine comes into effect.

In summary, the Lis Pendens rule applies to property transfers related to a pending suit or proceeding, including transfers made after the initiation of the suit or proceeding and before its resolution by a party to the case and third parties.

Lis Pendens is a legal principle that allows a court to permit a transfer of property, subject to certain conditions. In cases involving immovable property rights, the court can allow disposal of property while the case is ongoing. However, in cases like Vinod Seth v. Devinder Bajaj, the court allowed the defendants to sell the property with a security deposit of Rs. 3,000,000, exempting the case from the Lis Pendens doctrine.

FRADULENT TRANSFER (SECTION 53)

A transfer is deemed fraudulent and voidable at the affected party's discretion if it was made with the intention of misleading creditors or other interested parties. The interests of creditors and other parties who might suffer harm from a dishonest property transfer are safeguarded by this principle.

Intentional property transfers intended to defraud creditors are the main focus of Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (TPA), which deals with fraudulent transfers. Unless the transferee purchased the property in good faith and for a substantial sum of money, a property transfer is voidable, as defined in Section 53, giving any defrauded creditor the right to do so. Furthermore, the section describes a process for voiding these transfers.

Any transfer of real estate made with the intention of delaying or defeating the transferor's creditors is voidable at the discretion of any creditor who has been delayed or defeated. Nothing in this subsection shall restrict a transferee's rights for consideration and in good faith.

For instance, a fraudulent transfer occurs when "A" gives his property to "B" without actually transferring ownership in order to keep his assets out of the hands of his creditors. A civil cause of action arises from a fraudulent transfer of property. A fraudulent transfer may be revoked by the court upon the defrauded creditor's request.

PART PERFORMANCE (SECTION 53A)

The Doctrine of Part Performance is a property law principle that allows for the enforcement of oral or incomplete written contracts to transfer immovable property if certain conditions are met. It aims to prevent injustice and fraud by allowing individuals to enforce their rights to property even if the contract is not in compliance with formal requirements.

The doctrine of part performance is defined in Section 53-A of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It states that if a person contracts to transfer immovable property for consideration, and the transferee has taken possession of the property in part performance of the contract, the transferor or claiming party cannot enforce any rights against the transferee or claiming party, except for those expressly provided by the terms of the contract. This applies even if the transfer is not completed in the prescribed manner. An example is a contract where the transferee takes possession before the formal sale deed is executed.

?

DOCTRINES UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882

Doctrine of Cypress:

The idea of cypress is not specifically mentioned in the Transfer of Property Act. The French expression "cy près comme possible," which translates to "as near as possible," is where the word "cy-pres" originates.

The cypress doctrine serves as the foundation for Section 26 of the Transfer of Property Act. This means that if a contract stipulates that a person must meet specific requirements before obtaining an interest in the property, those requirements will be considered met if they have been significantly met.

Doctrine of Election:

Section 35 of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges the election doctrine.

Equity is the foundation of the doctrine. Based on the adage "no one can applaud and reprobate at the same time," it asserts that burden and benefit must coexist. According to section 35, a "election" is a decision between two rights that are incompatible. In light of this, an owner who decides to benefit from a transfer must forfeit any claim to the assets pledged as security for the benefit.

Doctrine of Holding Out:

It is sometimes referred to as the doctrine of the ostensible owner or the doctrine of apparent ownership. Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges it.

This theory comes into play when someone presents someone else as the property's owner and lets them handle it as though they were the real owner. In these situations, the actions of the person holding them out may bind the apparent owner.

According to this theory, the apparent owner may be regarded as the real owner if someone permits someone else to appear as the owner of the property and third parties legitimately depend on that appearance in their interactions with the property. It is possible to prevent the person who allowed the appearance from contesting the apparent owner's legitimacy or ownership. Doctrine of Feeding Grants by Estoppel:

Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges the theory of feeding grants by estoppel.

This legal principle is applicable when someone pledges to transfer ownership of immovable property they do not currently own but later acquires at any point while the transfer contract is in effect. In these situations, the individual who made the promise or representation might not be able to retract or deny the transfer when he later buys property

Doctrine of Lis Pendens:

Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges the lis pendens doctrine. It is a legal doctrine that comes from the Latin phrase "pending litigation."

The principle of ut lite pendente nihil innovator, which states that nothing new should be introduced while the suit is pending, is the foundation of the doctrine. It covers real estate that is the focus of an ongoing legal dispute.

The doctrine states that unless the court authorizes it, no property may be transferred while a lawsuit or other legal action is pending. Whether or not the transferee was aware of the lawsuit or proceeding, he is still subject to the court's ruling if the property is transferred.

Doctrine of Part Performance:

Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges the theory of part performance. Equity of part-performance is another name for it. Transferees of immovable property who have either taken possession of the property or fulfilled their obligations under the terms of the written and registered agreement for transfer are granted specific protections.

As a result, if someone enters into a contract to transfer real estate for payment and acts in furtherance of that agreement, the transferee has either taken possession of the property, fulfilled his end of the bargain, or is prepared and willing to do so. He wouldn't be forced to leave the property in this situation because the sale wasn't registered and the legal title hadn't been given to him.

Doctrine of Priority:

Section 48 of the Transfer of Property Act recognizes the doctrine of priority.

The priority doctrine typically functions according to the principle of "first in time, first in right." This implies that an earlier-created or acknowledged interest or claim will take precedence over later-arising interests or claims.

There may be exceptions that impact priority, even though the Doctrine of Priority usually follows a chronological order. For instance, in some situations, the priority of interests may be changed by the doctrine of estoppel or lis pendens.

Doctrine of Clog on Redemption:

One legal principle that pertains to mortgage transactions is the "doctrine of clog on redemption." Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act acknowledges the doctrine.

When an immovable property is mortgaged, the mortgagor is legally entitled to redeem the property after the loan or debt secured by the mortgage has been paid off. A clause that prohibits the mortgagor from redeeming the mortgaged property after loan repayment is known as a clog.

To put it another way, anything that prevents the mortgagor from redeeming his property is void and regarded as a clog.

Doctrine of Subrogation:

Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act recognizes the subrogation doctrine.

It is a legal principle that permits an individual or organization to take on the rights, obligations, or remedies of another party. It is frequently used in relation to mortgages, suretyship, and insurance.

According to this theory, the party whose rights are transferred is referred to as the "subrogor," and the individual or organization taking on another's rights is known as the "subrogee."

CONCLUSION

The foundation of Indian property law is comprised of the general principles and doctrines outlined in the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. They protect the interests of all parties involved by ensuring a methodical and open approach to real estate transactions. The Act encourages legal certainty and equity by laying out precise rules for property transferability, alienation prohibitions, and dispute resolution.

These guidelines not only make it easier for the real estate market to run smoothly but also support the nation's overall economic growth. An important piece of legislation that continues to provide a strong legal foundation for property transfers in India is the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Disclaimer: This article is conceptualized and prepared by Jurists Global Research team led by Manoj Pattanaik, ??assisted by the research Intern Mahek Mantri. This article provides general information and should not be considered as legal advice. For specific guidance regarding legal services in India on Immigration, International employment, International education, it is recommended to consult with a qualified law professional or legal expert of Jurists Global, who is familiar with the applicable laws and regulations.??

Subscribe and watch our videos to know more about us: https://www.youtube.com/@juristsglobal ?

Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/juristsglobal/ ?

Follow us on twitter: https://twitter.com/JuristsGlobal ?

Stay connected with us on LinkedIn: https://www.dhirubhai.net/company/juristsglobal/ and https://www.dhirubhai.net/company/juristsglobalofficial/ ?

Visit us to know more about us: https://juristsglobal.com/ ?

Rate us on Trustpilot: https://www.trustpilot.com/review/juristsglobal.com ?

If you want to give any kind of suggestions, please write to [email protected] with the URL