Transfer by unauthorised person who subsequently acquires interest in property transferred
Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 deals with transfer by unauthorised person who subsequently acquires interest in property transferred. Where a person [fraudulently or] erroneously represents that he is authorised to transfer certain immovable property and professes to transfer such property for consideration, such transfer shall, at the option of the transferee, operate on any interest which the transferor may acquire in such prope The Act came into force on 01 Jul 1882.
Where a person 1[fraudulently or] erroneously represents that he is authorised to transfer certain immovable property and professes to transfer such property for consideration, such transfer shall, at the option of the transferee, operate on any interest which the transferor may acquire in such property at any time during which the contract of transfer subsists.
Nothing in this section shall impair the right of transferees in good faith for consideration without notice of the existence of the said option.
Illustration
A, a Hindu who has separated from his father B, sells to C three fields, X, Y and Z, representing that A is authorised to transfer the same. Of these fields Z does not belong to A, it having been retained by B on the partition; but on B's dying A as heir obtains Z.C, not having rescinded the contract of sale, may require A to deliver Z to him .
Section 43, The Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (Act 4 of 1882).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Hardev Singh v. Gurmail Singh (Dead) by LRs
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment order-3.pdf 2007-02-02 DATE VERIFIED (S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju JJ.). Interprets TP Act s.43 feeding the estoppel: transferor who erroneously/fraudulently represents authority, then later acquires interest, feeds the earlier transfer at transferee’s option if the contract of transfer still subsists; distinguishes s.41 ostensible-owner estoppel (good faith + reasonable care). Lis pendens under s.52 does not render the sale void so as to defeat s.43.
On this section: s.43 feeding the estoppel — subsequent acquisition by unauthorised transferor operates on the earlier transfer at transferee’s option if contract subsists; distinguished from s.41 ostensible-owner good-faith care.
-
Ni. Pra Channabasava D. S. Matadhipathigalu vs C. P. Kaveeramma
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act 1882, which deals with transfer by an unauthorized person who subsequently acquires interest, does not apply to the revival or enforcement of mortgages created before the abolition and vesting of Inam lands in the State Government under the Karnataka Certain Inams Abolition Act 1977, because the essential precondition for invoking Section 43—that the transferor fraudulently or erroneously represented at the initial stage that he was authorized to transfer the property—is absent when land is statutorily vested in the State and subsequently re-granted, and therefore mortgagees cannot invoke Section 43 or the doctrine of feeding the grant or estoppel to claim revival of mortgages against a re-grantee.
On this section: Transfer by unauthorized person who subsequently acquires interest; Court held this section does not apply as the essential precondition of fraud or erroneous representation at initial stage is absent in Inam abolition context
-
H. P. A. International vs Bhagwandas Fatechand Daswani
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A contract for sale of property which is contingent on obtaining court sanction for transfer of interests of non-parties (reversioners) is an integrated, indivisible, and inseparable contract. When the essential contingency (court sanction) fails to materialize despite reasonable efforts by the vendor and despite the vendor's implied obligation to seek it within reasonable time, the contract becomes unenforceable. A buyer cannot invoke Section 12(3) of the Specific Relief Act to enforce partial relief (transfer of life interest alone) when: (a) the contract terms evince clear intention that parties contemplated all-or-nothing transaction; (b) explicit contractual clause (Clause 6) provides for cancellation if sanction not obtained; (c) no stipulation in contract provides for separate transfer of life interest if sanction for reversioners' interests fails; (d) the claim for partial relief is made after unreasonable delay and substantial change of circumstances; (e) reversioners, being non-parties to the contract, cannot be bound by doctrines of estoppel or trusts to give effect to a contract to which they never agreed; and (f) doing so would adversely affect the reversioners' independent interests and create future litigation. Courts cannot grant specific performance on terms not contemplated by the original contract parties, even if buyer attempts to waive the sanctioning clause.
On this section: Invoked by appellant to argue that subsequent vendee holding property with knowledge of prior contract is bound by estoppel. Court distinguished on ground that reversioners (non-parties) were not bound by estoppel.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… after the death of Nanjamma, Jayamma acquires the title over the property and in the meantime, the father of the defendants in his capacity as power of attorney holder of Jayamma sold the schedule property in favour of the defendants under the registered sale deed dated 04.12.2003 produced as per Ex.D1. In view of Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, subsequent acquisition of title by Jayamma would enure to the benefit of the defendants. Learned counsel also referred to Section 48 of Transfer of Property Act to contend that since Jayamma had executed several documents viz., Exs.D1, 7 to 9, the same are binding both on Jayamma as …
Questions about Section 43
What have the courts held on Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act?
Hardev Singh v. Gurmail Singh (Dead) by LRs (02 Feb 2007) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.43 feeding the estoppel — subsequent acquisition by unauthorised transferor operates on the earlier transfer at transferee’s option if contract subsists; distinguished from s.41 ostensible-owner good-faith care. Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2009.
How do I find court cases under Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: TP Act 43, section 43 TP Act, section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act. People searching for it also type tampa 43. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Hardev Singh v. Gurmail Singh (Dead) by LRs (02 Feb 2007).
When did Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act come into force?
Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, cited as TP Act 43, came into force on 01 Jul 1882, having been enacted on 17 Feb 1882. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 55. Rights and liabilities of buyer and seller1096 words
- 108. Rights and liabilities of lessor and lessee1030 words
- 69A. Appointment of receiver892 words
- 3. Interpretation-clause658 words
- 35. Election when necessary614 words
- 58. Mortgage , mortgagor , mortgagee , mortgage-money and mortgage- deed defined554 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.