Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

Property Law Assignment

Topic: Transfer by Ostensible


Harsh Jain
Ballb 6th Semester
Enrol- 01816503815
Ostensible Owner: Section 41 Transfer of Property Act, 1882:


Ostensible owner is the person who is though not the real owner but has all incidents and/or
characteristics as the real owner. The person on the face of it i. e apparently looks like the
real owner but in fact he is not the real owner .Though he owns the property and all the
property documents, papers and records are on his name on a minute scrutiny it can be found
that he has never the intention to own the property. The ostensible owner only fulfills and/or
carries somebody else's wishes and/or aims. As per the wishes of the ostensible owner puts his
name as an owner on the records of the property although his has the intention to own the
property. The money required as the consideration of the property is funded by the real owner
i.e. the person whose wishes are carried on by the ostensible owner, that person who had the
intention to buy the property.

Transfer by Ostensible Owner – Section 41, Transfer of Property Act, 1882

"Where, with the assent, express or inferred, of the people inspired by resolute property, a man is
the ostensible proprietor of such property and exchanges the same for thought, the exchange
should not be voidable on the ground that the transferor was not approved to make it:

Provided that the transferee, in the wake of taking sensible care to learn that the transferor had
energy to make the exchange, has acted in great faith."[1]

Ostensible proprietor isn't the genuine proprietor yet one who can speak to himself as the
genuine proprietor to the outsiders for such dealings. He has procured that privilege by the
persistent disregard or passive consent by the genuine proprietor of the property in this manner
presenting on him the status of ostensible proprietor. For example, when the property is in
spouse's name however the husband dealing with it and going into exchanges for her benefit is
the ostensible proprietor and has the expert to arrange it off.

The wonder of naming an ostensible proprietor is a guideline of characteristic value, which must
be generally pertinent, that where one man enables another to hold himself out as the proprietor
of a bequest, and a third individual buys it for esteem from the evident proprietor in the
conviction that he is the genuine proprietor, the man who so enables the other to hold himself our
might not be allowed to recoup upon his mystery title, unless he can topple that of the buyer by
appearing, either that he had coordinate notice, or something which adds up to useful notice, of
the genuine title, or that there existed conditions which should have put him upon a request that,
if arraigned would have prompted disclosure of it.[2]

The arrangement for its application sets out specific prerequisites to profit the advantage of this
area. They are:

• The essential condition is that the individual who is exchanging the property ought to be
ostensible proprietor ( as clarified previously)

• There ought to be either suggested or express assent from the proprietor of the property.

• The exchange ought to be for some thought in kind.

• Reasonable care must be taken by the transferee with respect to the expert of the
transferor to effectuate the exchange and furthermore of the way that he has acted in accordance
with some basic honesty.

• The teaching of exchange by ostensible proprietor depends on the convention of estoppel

that when genuine proprietor of property makes somebody evident to be the proprietor to
outsiders and they follow up on it, he can't backpedal his portrayal.

• These rules and the segment is accessible just to unflinching property and not on the
For determining whether a person is ostensible owner or not some practical tests could be

Right off the bat the reports worried about the property must be checked whether they contain
the name of transferor as proprietor or not. Also, regardless of whether the individual having his
name in the reports of the property being referred to has any aim to buy the same or not. Thirdly,
it is the most vital test for deciding if a man is ostensible proprietor is that who is the ownership
of the property and who is getting a charge out of it. In the event that the individual who is the
proprietor according to the records and the archives of the property in the current issue the odds
of being it a property of an ostensible proprietor or he being an ostensible proprietor is very less.
Be that as it may if the individual whose name is there in the property reports isn't comparable
then it upgrades its odds being a property of ostensible proprietor who is full documenting the
desires of the genuine proprietor.

However getting a charge out of the property here does not just mean the negligible satisfaction
in the property being in the ownership of the property yet incorporates the offering rights,
appropriate to rent out the said property and get the thought from the same , to appreciate the
advantages out of the said property and so forth. Satisfaction has been given a more extensive
viewpoint in this perspective and specific case. Fourthly, the purpose for it being given the part
of ostensible possession, i.e the motivation behind why the genuine proprietor has not bought
same in his own name.

Authority of ostensible owner and not the title is necessary:

Taking a gander at cases of such exchanges, a benami exchange is one where one purchases
property for the sake of another or in the mask of a recipient exchange, without demonstrating a
goal to profit the other. The benamidar however has a property in his name, has no helpful
enthusiasm existing in the same. He speaks to in actuality the genuine proprietor and to the
extent their relative lawful position is concerned, he is a simple trustee for him. Benami
exchange brings about formation of a trust. The general administer and guideline of the Indian
law as to coming about trusts varies a little from the general govern of English law upon a
similar subject. In India, a benamidar is an ostensible proprietor and if a man buys from a
benamidar, the genuine proprietor can't recuperate unless he demonstrates that the buyer had real
or productive notice of the genuine title. Yet, from this it doesn't take after that the benamidar
has genuine title to the property, he is only an ostensible proprietor thereof.[3]
Consent of owner and authority of ostensible owner is material:
Activities of proprietor likewise build up whether he has approved a person as ostensible
proprietor or not. Assent of proprietor over this expert is the essential of this arrangement to
apply. On the off chance that a proprietor with his free assent gives obvious expert to some - one
to go into exchanges for his sake, at that point that evident specialist is esteemed to be genuine
authority.[4] For the situation Ananthula Sudhakar v. P.Bucha Reddy[5] , the litigant Damodar
Rao consulted with offended parties, available to be purchased of the two destinations, for the
benefit of his sister Rukminibai, speaking to that his sister was the proprietor thereof . He
confirmed the deal deeds in the support of offended parties as witness and by making his sister as
merchant executant. Those demonstrations of Damodar Rao upheld the claim of Rukmanibai that
there was an oral blessing. However even there has not been an oral blessing for Rukmanibai and
Damodar Rao still remains the proprietor, the previously mentioned demonstrations of Damodar
Rao demonstrated that he has given inferred assent for her portrayal as ostensible proprietor of
the suit property and to exchange the same to offended parties for thought. This pulled in the
arrangement of segment 41 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and along these lines the moves for
offended parties was not voidable at the occurrence of Damodar Rao or his successor claiming
that Rukmanibai was not the proprietor of the property. For being an ostensible proprietor, not
the title but rather the expert emerging from either express or suggested assent of proprietor is

In the historic point case Shafiquallah v. Samiulah[6], after the passing of proprietor, the
property was in control of his ill-conceived children who were legitimately ineligible to hold the
property. The genuine beneficiary filled a suit asserting his privileges of legacy. However the
holders held the ownership and sold it to an outsider, asserting themselves to be ostensible
proprietors. However present lawful position can't pull in area 41 as the ownership was not
neither with express nor suggested assent of the true blue proprietor. Also assent must not be
comprehended to incorporate an aim to trick the transferee with respect to the genuine proprietor
nor is the need to demonstrate it.[7]

Transfer does not include an involuntary transfer:

This area just applies to deliberate exchanges not to automatic or legitimately commanded
exchanges like ones by the request of the court, for example, a closeout sale.[8]

Transfer include a partial transfer:

For the arrangement to apply there is no important deal or trade to occur. It just signifies to an
exchange of intrigue which could be contract, rent and so forth and consequently an ostensible
mortgagee could be held as an ostensible mortgagee.[9]
The transfer has to be against some consideration:
The exchange entered by ostensible proprietor must be for thought. There must be a component
of renumeration. This area does not ponder gratitutious exchanges.

Extent of rights of transferee:

Likewise the privileges of the transferees making a buy from ostensible proprietor relies on the
degree to which the ostensible proprietor has rights in the said property. For the situation State of
Punjab v. Surjit Kaur[10], proprietor's dowager had a specialist over his bequest as an ostensible
proprietor, in any case it being restricted just to life intrigue. Henceforth the privileges of the
transferee buying the property from her eventual co-broad with her and subsequently will stop to
exist with her life time.

Duties of Transferee during transaction:

Segment 41[11] alongside saying nature of specialist of an ostensible proprietor additionally lays
accentuation on aim of transferee and the obligation of care he needs to oblige to amid the
exchange. It gives that an exchange by an ostensible proprietor can't be maintained a strategic
distance from on the ground that the transferor was not approved therefor, subject to the
condition that the transferee should take sensible care to find out that the transferor had energy to
make the exchange and to act in accordance with some basic honesty before an advantage
thereof is asserted by him.[12]

Burden of proof:
The weight of confirmation is on the transferee to demonstrate that the individual making the
exchange was infact the ostensible proprietor and had the imperative expert for such
transactions.[13] He ought to in any event demonstrate that is a benami exchange. Additionally
he should demonstrate that he took sensible care to secure his interest.[14] And subsequently
likewise should make significant request.
The Transfer is not voidable at the option of owner:
At the point when an exchange is made by ostensible proprietor this area gives that the exchange
should not be voidable on the ground that the transferor was not approved to make it ; gave the
transferee has taken due care and must have acted in good faith. The principle applies when the
whole transaction is not voidable.[15]


The essay stresses on the legal provision in Transfer of Property Act, 1882 defining the powers of
ostensible owner and discussing the nature of transactions entered by him. Ostensible owner has
as its more prominent characteristic the authority given by the owner of the property to enter
transactions on his behalf. The consent for this authority could be either express or implied which
could be understood by various landmark case laws. However consent does not include an
intention to deceive. Also once made the transfer of property is not voidable at the option of the
owner. This transfer also include partial transfers like mortgage, lease along with complete transfer
of rights like sale, exchange. Also the law places burden of proving that the transferor is ostensible
owner, on the transferee. He must also act bona fide in good faith and make proper inquiries as to
the status of transfer and be vigilant.