Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act embodies the doctrine of part — Performance which reads as under: The will bequeathing such interest and property to B failed due to want for proper attestation. The above provisions have been enacted to give equity. The proviso is The doctrine of part performance exception of sorts stating that the interests and rights of a subsequent transferee for consideration will be protected as long as he had no notice of the contract leading to the part performance due or the part performance thereof.
The scope of this section is only limited to imposing a bar against the enforcement of rights by a transferor in respect of a property of which the possession has already been taken by the transferor.
In order to sue upon a contract, only the person who is being sued is required to have signed the document whether a contract or written proof of an oral agreement. When all the essentials of this section are satisfied the defendant is entitled to invoke the benefit of the section.
In order to be eligible for protection of the above doctrine of part performance, it must be shown that there is a contract to transfer for consideration, the immovable property. When a series of acts are done in part performance, one such act may be payment of consideration.
The act must be in furtherance to the contract and not otherwise. B sued K for arrears of rent and eviction before the expiry of the patta. This can be seen in Kingswood Estate v Anderson: Once there is some evidence of part performance, it is enough to allow the admission of parol evidence to prove the exact terms.
They can only enforce a right expressly provided by the terms of the contract entered into between the parties. In deciding whether a valid contract exists through correspondence, there must be clear indication within the correspondence that an offer was made and that the offer was accepted.
In that decision, the court found that an offer signed only by the party making the offer, but not by the vendor, was binding on the vendor as all of the essential terms were established and the agreement was enforceable on the basis of part performance.
Longsdale is not applicable in India — as it did not constitute the doctrine of part performance.
This is based on the principle that, equity treats the subject-matter of a contract as to its effects in the same manner as if the act contemplated in the contract has been fully executed, from the moment the agreement has been made, though all formalities of the contract have not been yet completed.
Here B is ready to perform his part of the contract but A is not.The doctrine of part performance is inserted in the Transfer of Property Act,by Act 20 ofsection This is an equitable doctrine. Agreements of Purchase and Sale and Leases: The Statute of Frauds and Part Performance.
Original Newsletter(s) this article was published in: Blaneys on Building: June There is an old saying that an oral agreement is not worth the paper it is written on.
The Doctrine of Part Performance.
Essentials of the doctrine of part performance (20A) a) There must be a written contract for transfer of an immovable property signed by or on behalf of the transferor. The doctrine can not be applied if there is a void agreement or no agreement.
Doctrine of Part Performance Definition. An exception to the Statute of Frauds’ requirement that certain contracts must be in writing to be enforceable.
Even when there is an oral agreement that is otherwise governed by the Statute of Frauds, the doctrine of part performance treats partial performance in reliance on the oral agreement and. Doctrine of part performance is a very important provision under the Transfer of Property Act and the relevant provisions have been enacted under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.
Part-Performance Doctrine Part-Performance doctrine is an equitable principle that allows a court to recognize and enforce an oral contract despite its legal deficiencies. It provides a way around the statutory bar to the enforcement of an oral contract.Download