Hari Om v. Shakuntala Devi
Rule established
S.53A protects possession against the transferor and any person claiming under the transferor, including subsequent purchasers
Facts
- A entered into a written agreement to sell property to B; B took possession and paid substantial consideration
- A then sold the same property to C through a registered sale deed
- C (subsequent purchaser) sought to evict B
- B invoked S.53A as a defense
Issue
- Whether S.53A protects the first transferee (in possession under part performance) against a subsequent purchaser from the same transferor.
Held
- S.53A protects B's possession against C. Since C claims through A (the original transferor), C is bound by the same limitations that bound A. A could not have evicted B (S.53A defense); therefore, C (who derives title from A) also cannot evict B.
Ratio Decidendi
The protection of S.53A extends to "any person claiming under" the transferor. A subsequent purchaser traces their title back to the transferor and therefore steps into the transferor's shoes with all limitations. The transferor could not give better rights than they themselves had.
How to use it in an exam
Important for three-party problems (seller → first buyer in possession → second buyer with registered deed). Key line: "S.53A protects against subsequent purchasers claiming through the transferor."
Source
Source: Mulla TPA 13th ed.
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.