The Supreme Court held that the act of taking illegal possession of property or the continuance of wrongful possession of property does not amount to "otherwise dealing with the property" so as to attract section 52, even if the wrong doer be a party to the suit. This was held in case of:
A. Narain Singh v. Iman Din, (1934) 154 IC 729
B. Dhansingh v. Sushilabai, AIR 1968 MP 229
C. Harnam Singh v. Jiwan, 1906 PR 7
D. Rajendra Singh v. Sama Singh, AIR 1973 SC 2537
Answer: Option D
This Question Belongs to Law >> Transfer Of Property Act
Related Questions on 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