Section 3 The Transfer of Property Act, 1882


 Section 3 The Transfer of Property Act, 1882: 

Interpretation clause.—In this Act, unless there is something repugnant in the subject or context,— “immoveable property” does not include standing timber, growing crops or grass; ‘‘instrument” means a non-testamentary instrument; 1[“attested”, in relation to an instrument, means and shall be deemed always to have meant attested by two or more witnesses each of whom has seen the executant sign or affix his mark to the instrument, or has seen some other person sign the instrument in the presence and by the direction of the executant, or has received from the executant a personal acknowledgement of his signature or mark, or of the signature of such other person, and each of whom has signed the instrument in the presence of the executant; but it shall not be necessary that more than one of such witnesses shall have been present at the same time, and no particular form of attestation shall be necessary;] “registered” means registered in 2[3[any part of the territories] to which this Act extends] under the law4 for the time being in force regulating the registration of documents; “attached to the earth” means—

(a) rooted in the earth, as in the case of trees and shrubs;

(b) imbedded in the earth, as in the case of walls or buildings; or

(c) attached to what is so imbedded for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of that to which it is attached; 5[“actionable claim” means a claim to any debt, other than a debt secured by mortgage of immoveable property or by hypothecation or pledge of moveable property, or to any beneficial interest in moveable property not in the possession, either actual or constructive, of the claimant, which the Civil Courts recognise as affording grounds for relief, whether such debt or beneficial interest be existent, accruing, conditional or contingent;] 6[“a person is said to have notice” of a fact when he actually knows that fact, or when, but for wilful abstention from an enquiry or search which he ought to have made, or gross negligence, he would have known it. Explanation I.—Where any transaction relating to immoveable property is required by law to be and has been effected by a registered instrument, any person acquiring such property or any part of, or share or interest in, such property shall be deemed to have notice of such instrument as from the date of registration or, where the property is not all situated in one sub-district, or where the registered instrument has been registered under sub-section (2) of section 30 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), from the earliest date on which any memorandum of such registered instrument has been filed by any Sub-Registrar within whose sub-district any part of the property which is being acquired, or of the property wherein a share or interest is being acquired, is situated:] Provided that—

(1) the instrument has been registered and its registration completed in the manner prescribed by the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), and the rules made thereunder,

(2) the instrument or memorandum has been duly entered or filed, as the case may be, in books kept under section 51 of that Act, and

(3) the particulars regarding the transaction to which the instrument relates have been correctly entered in the indexes kept under section 55 of that Act. Explanation II.—Any person acquiring any immovable property or any share or interest in any such property shall be deemed to have notice of the title, if any, of any person who is for the time being in actual possession thereof. Explanation III.—A person shall be deemed to have had notice of any fact if his agent acquires notice thereof whilst acting on his behalf in the course of business to which that fact is material: Provided that, if the agent fraudulently conceals the fact, the principal shall not be charged with notice thereof as against any person who was a party to or otherwise cognizant of the fraud.

Supreme Court of India Important Judgments And Leading Case Law Related to Section 3 The Transfer of Property Act, 1882: 

Nk Rajendra Mohan vs Thirvamadi Rubber Co. Ltd And Ors on 2 July, 2015

Bhagwan Das vs Paras Nath on 27 September, 1968

Visakhapatnam Municipality vs Kandregula Nukaraju & Ors on 29 August, 1975

Angurbala Mullick vs Debabrata Mullick on 3 May, 1951

Savita Dey vs Nageswar Majumdar And Anr on 26 September, 1995

Pabitra Kumar Roy & Anr vs Alita D' Souza on 27 September, 2006

Yedida Chakradhararao (Dead)  vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. Etc on 29 March, 1990

R.B. Chaudhary Raghuraj Singh vs Murari Lal & Ors on 16 March, 1967

Laxman Marotrao Navakhare vs Keshavrao Eknathsa Tapar on 2 March, 1993

Mylapore Hindu Permanant Ltd. vs K. S. Subramania Iyer on 6 May, 1970

To download this dhara / Section of  Transfer of Property Act, 1882 in pdf format use chrome web browser and use keys [Ctrl + P] and save as pdf.


Popular posts from this blog

100 Questions on Indian Constitution for UPSC 2020 Pre Exam

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India