Under S.43, where a person fraudulently or erroneously represents that he is authorised to transfer property and professes to transfer it for consideration, and the transferee acts upon such representation in good faith, then if the transferor SUBSEQUENTLY acquires any interest in that property, such interest is deemed to automatically vest in the transferee. The prior defective transfer is "fed" by the subsequently acquired title.
Why: The transferor represented having title and received consideration for it. Equity will not allow them to later say "I didn't have title when I transferred, so the transfer is void" after they actually acquire that very title. The transferor is estopped from denying the transfer.
Legal Framework
| Provision | Subject |
|---|---|
| S.43, TPA | Estoppel: transfer by person having defective title; subsequently acquiring interest feeds the transfer |
| S.6(a), TPA | Spes successionis: mere chance of an heir (non-transferable) S.43 does NOT apply to spes successionis |
| S.41, TPA | Transfer by ostensible owner (different involves true owner's consent) |
| S.115, Evidence Act | Estoppel: general principle (a person who makes a representation cannot deny it) |
Requirements of S.43
| # | Requirement | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Representation of authority | Transferor represents (fraudulently or erroneously) that they are authorised to transfer |
| 2 | Transfer for consideration | Must be for value (not a gift) |
| 3 | Transferee acts in good faith | Honest belief in transferor's representation |
| 4 | Transferor subsequently acquires interest | Transferor later obtains title/interest in the same property |
| 5 | Property is NOT merely spes successionis | S.43 does NOT apply to transfer of a mere chance of inheritance (S.6(a)) |
When S.43 Applies vs. When It Does Not
| Scenario | S.43 Applies? | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| A sells B's land to C (representing it as his own); A later inherits it | ✅ Yes | A represented authority + later acquired title |
| A sells "my future share in father's property" while father is alive | ❌ No | This is spes successionis (S.6(a)); S.43 expressly excludes it |
| A sells land claiming ownership; land actually belongs to government (A never acquires it) | ❌ No | A never subsequently acquires interest |
| A sells land erroneously believing it is his; A later buys it from the true owner | ✅ Yes | Erroneous representation + subsequent acquisition |
| A gifts land representing it as his own; A later acquires title | ❌ No | Gift is not "for consideration" |
Illustrations
-
Classic feeding the grant: Ravi tells Suresh: "I own this plot in Madhapur" (he does not). Ravi executes a sale deed, takes Rs. 15 lakhs from Suresh. Two years later, Ravi's uncle dies and Ravi inherits that very plot. Under S.43, the moment Ravi inherits, the title AUTOMATICALLY passes to Suresh. Ravi cannot say "the original sale was void because I had no title." Ravi is estopped he represented having title, took money, and now has the title. The grant is "fed."
-
Spes successionis exception: Same Ravi tells Suresh: "I am selling you my expected share in my father's property. My father is old and will die soon." Father is alive. This is a transfer of a mere expectation spes successionis under S.6(a). Even if father later dies and Ravi inherits, S.43 does NOT feed this transfer because S.43 expressly excludes transfers that are void under S.6(a). The distinction: in illustration 1, Ravi represented PRESENT ownership. In illustration 2, Ravi honestly disclosed that it was a FUTURE hope. The representation matters.
-
Erroneous belief (not fraud): Meena believes she owns a plot (her father told her it was transferred to her, but the deed was never registered). Meena sells to Kavitha in good faith. Later, Meena's father executes a proper registered deed in Meena's favour. Under S.43, Meena's newly acquired title feeds the earlier transfer to Kavitha. S.43 applies to BOTH fraudulent and erroneous representations.
-
Race between S.43 transferee and subsequent buyer: Ravi (having no title) sells to Suresh in 2020. Ravi acquires title in 2023. Before Suresh registers anything, Ravi sells the SAME property to Deepak (with proper title) in 2024. Deepak registers his deed. Who wins? Per Jumma Masjid (1962): S.43 feeds the grant automatically upon acquisition. Suresh's title vested the moment Ravi acquired in 2023 even without fresh registration. But if Deepak is a bona fide purchaser without notice of Suresh's prior claim, the equities balance differently. Courts examine notice and registration to resolve.
Recall Check
- What is the effect when a person who wrongly represented authority subsequently acquires the property?
- Why does S.43 not apply to transfers of spes successionis (S.6(a))?
- What is the distinction between "fraudulent" and "erroneous" representation under S.43?
Key Cases
Jumma Masjid v. Kodimaniandra Deviah (1962) Jumma-Masjid-v-Kodimaniandra-Deviah-1962 Issue: Whether S.43 operates automatically to vest the subsequently acquired interest in the original transferee, and whether it conflicts with S.6(a). Rule: S.43 and S.6(a) operate in different fields. S.6(a) prohibits transfer of a mere expectation. S.43 applies where the transferor professes a PRESENT title (not a future hope). When the transferor later acquires the interest, it automatically feeds the earlier grant. Held: S.43 operates as an estoppel against the transferor. The interest passes to the transferee the moment the transferor acquires it, without any fresh conveyance. S.43 does not conflict with S.6(a) because they address different situations.
Official Assignee Madras v. Sampath Naidu (1933) Official-Assignee-v-Sampath-Naidu-1933 Issue: Whether S.43 requires the transferee to have acted in good faith to claim the benefit of the subsequently acquired interest. Rule: S.43 protects only a transferee who has taken the transfer in good faith and for consideration. If the transferee knew the transferor had no title, S.43 does not apply. Held: Good faith is a mandatory condition. A transferee who knows the transferor has no title at the time of transfer cannot invoke S.43 to claim the subsequently acquired interest.
Distinctions
| Basis | S.43 (Feeding the Grant) | S.41 (Ostensible Owner) |
|---|---|---|
| Who is protected | Original transferee (from the person who lacked title) | Third-party buyer (from person appearing as owner) |
| Role of true owner | Irrelevant (true owner's consent not needed) | True owner must have consented to ostensible ownership |
| When title passes | When transferor SUBSEQUENTLY acquires title | Immediately at time of transfer |
| Transferor's representation | Represents having present authority to transfer | Appears to be owner (with true owner's acquiescence) |
| Principle | Estoppel against transferor | Estoppel against true owner |
| Consideration | Required | Required |
| Good faith | Required (of transferee) | Required (of buyer) |
| Basis | S.43 (Feeding the Grant) | S.6(a) (Spes Successionis) |
|---|---|---|
| What is transferred | Present claimed right (transferor SAYS "I own it now") | Future hope (transferor SAYS "I may own it someday") |
| Validity | Transfer itself may be defective but is "fed" later | Transfer void ab initio; never becomes valid |
| Representation | Present ownership/authority | Future expectation (honest disclosure) |
| Effect of subsequent acquisition | Feeds the grant; transferee gets title | Does NOT revive the void transfer |
| Policy | Prevents transferor from profiting from own wrong | Prevents speculation on human mortality |
Flashcards
Q: What is the doctrine of "feeding the grant by estoppel" under S.43? A: When a person fraudulently or erroneously represents authority and transfers property for consideration, and later acquires that property, the subsequently acquired interest automatically vests in the original transferee.
Q: Does S.43 require a fresh conveyance to pass the subsequently acquired interest? A: No. The interest passes automatically upon the transferor's acquisition. No fresh deed is needed (Jumma Masjid, 1962).
Q: Why does S.43 not apply to spes successionis? A: Because spes successionis (S.6(a)) is a transfer of a FUTURE HOPE, not a representation of PRESENT title. The transferor in S.6(a) honestly discloses they don't own it yet. In S.43, the transferor claims to own it NOW.
Q: What is the role of good faith in S.43? A: The transferee must have acted in good faith (honestly believed the transferor had title). If the transferee knew the transferor had no title, S.43 does not protect them (Official Assignee v. Sampath Naidu, 1933).
Q: What is the key factual difference between S.43 and S.41? A: S.41: true owner consents to another appearing as owner → innocent buyer protected against true owner. S.43: transferor claims title they don't have → original transferee protected when transferor later gets title.
Q: Can S.43 apply to a gift? A: No. S.43 requires "transfer for consideration." A gift (gratuitous transfer) is not covered.
Exam Scenario
X represents to Y that X owns a plot of land and sells it to Y for Rs. 20 lakhs by registered deed. Y takes possession in good faith. One year later, X inherits the same plot from his deceased father. X then attempts to sell the same plot to Z for Rs. 25 lakhs. Both Y and Z claim the property. Advise.
Approach: (1) X represented present authority and transferred for consideration to Y (Rs. 20 lakhs). Y acted in good faith. (2) Is this spes successionis? NO X represented "I own it now," not "I will inherit it someday." S.6(a) does not apply; S.43 does. (3) Under S.43, the moment X inherited (acquired interest), the title automatically vested in Y. No fresh deed needed (Jumma Masjid, 1962). (4) X's subsequent sale to Z is by a person who has no remaining interest title already passed to Y. Z gets nothing (unless Z qualifies under S.41 as buyer from ostensible owner with Y's consent unlikely on facts). (5) Y wins. Z's remedy: sue X for fraud/breach of warranty and recovery of Rs. 25 lakhs. (6) Priority: Y's interest crystallised the moment X inherited. Z's deed, though registered later, cannot defeat a title that vested by operation of law (S.43) at an earlier date.