Doctrine of Part Performance
๐น Doctrine of Part Performance
1. Statutory Basis
Found in Section 53A, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (inserted by the Amendment Act of 1929).
It is based on the English equitable doctrine of part performance.
2. Meaning
If a person has taken possession of property or has done something in furtherance of a contract (like paying consideration, making improvements), even if the contract is not registered or formally executed, the transferor is stopped (estopped) from denying the transfer.
๐ In simple words: If the buyer has partly performed his side of the bargain, the seller cannot go back on his promise just because the document is not formally registered.
3. Essential Conditions (as per Section 53A)
Existence of a Contract
Must be a written contract for transfer of immovable property.
Signed by Transferor
The contract must be signed by the person transferring property.
Consideration
The transferee has paid or is willing to pay consideration.
Possession
The transferee has taken possession of the property (or continues in possession if already there).
Act in Furtherance of Contract
The transferee has done some act in furtherance (e.g., construction, improvement).
Willingness to Perform
The transferee must be ready and willing to perform his part of the contract.
4. Legal Effect
Shield, not a sword:
The doctrine can only be used as a defense by the transferee.
It does not confer ownership, only protection of possession.
Transferee cannot sue for ownership, but he can resist eviction by the transferor.
5. Case Laws
(a) Mohan Lal v. Mirza Abdul Gaffar, (1996) 1 SCC 639
Facts: Buyer took possession on basis of unregistered sale deed, seller tried to evict.
Held: Buyer could protect his possession under Section 53A.
Principle: Doctrine of part performance is a defense โ it can be used as a shield, not a sword.
(b) Shyam Narayan Prasad v. Krishna Prasad, (2018) 7 SCC 646
Facts: Buyer in possession but not ready to pay balance consideration.
Held: Since willingness to perform his part was missing, he could not claim protection.
Principle: Readiness and willingness are mandatory.
(c) Delhi Motor Co. v. U.A. Basrurkar, AIR 1968 SC 794
Principle: Section 53A does not create title; it only prevents transferor from enforcing rights against transferee in possession.
(d) Technicians Studio v. Lila Ghosh, AIR 1977 Cal 418
Held: If transferee is in possession and willing to perform his part, transferor cannot evict even if formal registration not done.
(e) Rambhau Namdeo Gajre v. Narayan Bapuji Dhotra, (2004) 8 SCC 614
Principle: Transferee under Section 53A cannot transfer his rights to a third party, because he is not the owner โ only protected in possession.
6. Limitations of Doctrine
Does not confer ownership/title.
Cannot be used against a bona fide purchaser for value without notice.
Can only be used as a defense, not as an action for enforcing ownership.
Requires willingness to perform contractual obligations.
7. Example
A agrees in writing to sell his land to B for โน10 lakh.
B pays โน8 lakh, takes possession, and constructs a boundary wall.
Sale deed not registered.
Later, A tries to evict B claiming โno valid sale.โ
๐ Court: B can protect possession under Section 53A because he partly performed and is willing to pay balance.
โ Summary
Doctrine of Part Performance (Sec. 53A TPA, 1882) prevents a transferor from evicting transferee if the transferee has partly performed his obligations and is ready to perform the rest.
It acts as a shield (defense), not a sword (ownership right).
Key cases: Mohan Lal v. Mirza Abdul Gaffar (shield not sword), Shyam Narayan Prasad v. Krishna Prasad (readiness to perform), Delhi Motor Co. v. Basrurkar (no title created).
RELATED Blog
0 comments