A' a Hindu who is separated from his father 'B', sells to 'C' three houses 'X', 'Y and 'Z', representing that 'A' was authorized to transfer the same, 'Y' however does not belong to 'A', it having being retained by 'B' on partition; but on 'B's dying 'A' as heir obtains 'Y'. Here, can 'C' file a suit requiring 'A' to deliver 'Y' to him?
A. Yes, if the contract still subsists
B. Only if 'A' was the authorized owner of 'Y' at the time of entering into the agreement to sell with 'C'
C. Only if 'A' has not leased out the property
D. None of the above
Answer: Option A
This Question Belongs to Law >> Transfer Of Property Act
A. Section 13
B. Section 14
C. Section 15
D. Section 16
Case of "Raj Kumar Kundu v. Mcqueen" is related to
A. Lis pendens
B. Part performance
C. Mortgage
D. Ostensible owner
A. Transfer by ostensible owner of the property for consideration
B. Transfer by owner of the property in which a widowhas life interest for maintenance
C. Both A and B
D. Neither A nor B
Which property cannot be transferred?
A. A public office
B. A mere chance to succeed
C. A mere right of re-entry
D. All of the above
Join The Discussion