Skip to main content

Concept of conditional transfers under TPA

 

Conditional Transfers under Transfer of Property Act, 1882


INTRODUCTION

Section 25 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 provides for Conditional Transfer. It means that any transfer that happens on the fulfilment of a condition that is imposed on the other party for the transfer of property.

For any kind of a conditional transfer to be valid, the condition that is imposed should not be:

  1. Prohibited by law,

  2. Should not be an act that involves fraudulent acts,

  3. Should not be any act that is impossible,

  4. Should not be an act that is termed as violative of public policy,

  5. Should not be immoral,

  6. Any act that incurs any harm to any person or his property.

Types of Conditions on Transfer

There are three specific types of conditions that are imposed in a transfer of property and there are some more types provided. All these conditions should also satisfy all the requirements of a condition as mentioned in Section 25 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Condition Precedent

It is given in Section 26 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Any condition that is required to be fulfilled before the transfer of any property is called a condition precedent. This condition is not to be strictly followed and the transfer can take place even when there has been substantial compliance of the condition. For example, A is ready to transfer his property to B on the condition that he needs to take the consent of X, Y and Z before marrying. Z dies and afterward, B takes the consent of X and Y so the transfer can take place as there has been substantial compliance.

Condition Subsequent

It is given in Section 29 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Any condition that is required to be fulfilled after the transfer of any property is called condition subsequent. This condition is to be strictly complied with and the transfer will happen only after the completion of such condition. For example, A transfers any property ‘X’ to B on the condition that he has to score above 75 percent in his university exams. If B fails to achieve 75 percent marks then the transfer will break down and the property will revert back to A.

Although it is an essential requirement that the condition needs to lawful and if it is not then the condition will be held as void and the transfer will not break down and will be finalized. For example, A transfers the property to B on the condition that he shall murder C. This condition is void and hence transfer will go through and the property will be kept by B.

 

Condition Collateral

Any condition that is required to be fulfilled simultaneously after the transfer of any property is called condition collateral. It needs to be strictly followed otherwise the transfer will break down. For example, A transfers property ‘X’ to B on the condition that he shall maintain A’s wife C for a period of 10 years. If B complies with it and maintains C, the transfer will be valid and the property will be in the possession of B. 

 

 

 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more