Section 114 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, affords protection to the tenant against forfeiture while the tenant enjoys the immunity from eviction for default in the payment of rent, the land lord gets the corresponding benefit of recovery even of such areas as are not legally recoverable. Such an equitable provision as is engrafted shall govern only to such an extent which does not run counter to any specific statutory provision. This was held in:
A. Shyam Bhagwan Dubey v. Shaikh Nizam, AIR 1994 MP 52
B. Prithivichand Ramchand Sablok v. S. Y. Shinde, AIR 1993 SC 1929
C. Vasant Kumar Radhakrishan v. Board of Trustees of Port of Bombay, AIR 1991 SC 14
D. Ramesh Kumar Jha v. Official Assignee, High Court of Bombay, AIR 1993 Bom 374
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