Possession of a manager cannot be treated as ostensible ownership with the consent of the real owner. This was held in case of:
A. Seshumulla M. Shah v. Sayed Abdul Rashid, AIR 1991 Kant 273
B. Ved Kumar v. Union of India, AIR 1989 NOC 136
C. Motimul Sowvar v. Vijalakshi Ammal, AIR 1965 Mad 432
D. B. Sitaram Rao v. Bibhushana, AIR 1978 Ori 222
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