Dhanalakshmi v Jinarajadasa
Rule established
S.53A is a shield (defence), not a sword (cause of action); does not confer title, only protects possession
Facts
- Transferee in possession under written agreement sought declaration of title based on S.53A
- Used S.53A as a cause of action (sword) rather than a defence (shield)
Issue
- Whether S.53A confers title on the transferee or merely provides a defence to possession.
Held
- S.53A is a shield, not a sword. It protects possession against eviction by the transferor. The transferee cannot use S.53A to claim declaration of title. For title, specific performance must be sought.
Ratio Decidendi
S.53A says the transferor "shall not enforce any right" inconsistent with the contract. This is defensive language: it bars the transferor from evicting. It does not affirmatively vest title in the transferee. Legal title passes only upon registration of a sale deed.
How to use it in an exam
Primary authority on the nature of S.53A. Key line: "S.53A is a shield to protect possession, not a sword to claim title."
Source
Source: AIR 1982 Supreme Court 169
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.
Cited in study notes
Doctrine of Part-PerformanceS.53A: shield not sword; does not confer title