CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYA NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA - 800001

ROUGH DRAFT SUBMITTED IN THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

COURSE TITLED –

PROPERTY LAW
On The Topic
DOCTRINE OF ELECTION

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -

DR. B. RAVI NARAYAN SARMA
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW
NAME: ARIHANT SINGH
SEMESTER: III
ROLL NO.: 1718
COURSE: B.A., L.L.B(HONS)
SESSION: (2017-2022)
 INTRODUCTION

The intention of enacting the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was to define and amend the
existing law, rather than introducing new principles. The Act utilizes principles of equity,
justice and good conscience. The primary objectives of the Act were to initially convey the
rules that regulate the transfer of property between living persons with accordance to the rules
that affect devolution of property upon death. This provides for and complements the work
commenced in framing the law of testamentary and intestate succession. The second objective
was to complete the code of Contract Law as it would relate to immovable property.

The Doctrine of Election is applicable to both movable and immovable property. The
foundational basis of the doctrine of election is that a person gaining a benefit under an
instrument must also bear the consequential burden, and that they may not take under and
against the same instrument, as held in Beepathumma v/s Kadambolithaya. Election is an
obligation of having to choose one among two inconsistent or alternative rights in a situation
where the grantor’s intention is that the grantee should not receive both. Under any instrument
if two rights are conferred on a person in such a manner that one right is lieu of the other, he is
bound to elect only one of them.

To illustrate this, suppose Adam offers Rs. 2 lakhs to Brad in lieu of transfer of his plot. Brad
may elect only one of the two options; he may retain the money and transfer his plot or he may
retain his plot and deny the money. He cannot enjoy both benefits.

This project attempts to discuss the various nuances associated with the doctrine of election
through the discussion of various landmark judgments. Special importance has been given to
provide a true understanding of the required conditions for the election by the original owner
to take place. The differences between the Indian Law perspective as well as the English Law
perspective is brought out through critical analysis of the provisions i.e. Principle of forfeiture
and Principle of compensation.

1
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

 to critically analyse the Doctrine of Election under Transfer of Property Act, 1882
 to find out the pros and cons of this doctrine.

HYPOTHESIS

The researcher has presumed

 that Indian Trusts Act give the people the right to transfer the property to another
person upon the death of the transferee.
 the researcher presumes that this act prevents the transferor from gaining wrongful
benefit from the transferees.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In this project Doctrinal Method will be used. Doctrinal Methods refer to Library research,
research or processes done upon some texts writings or Documents, legal propositions and
Doctrines, Articles, Books as well as Online Research and Journals relating to the subject.

SOURCES OF STUDY

 Primary sources: Case Law, Legal Sources, Acts, etc.

 Secondary Sources: Newspapers, journals, periodicals, etc.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

There are various hindrances which can be faced by the researcher during the formation of this
project such as scarcity of time, expensive legal materials for various research works, research
done by an individual.

2
RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What is Doctrine of Election under transfer of property act, 1882?

2. What is the purpose of Doctrine of Election?
3. How this act benefits the rights and privileges of the transferees and the transferors?
4. How this act prevents wrongful benefit of the owner from the transferee?

TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION

1. Introduction
2. Doctrine of Election
3. Ingredients of Doctrine of Election
4. Rules for Election
5. Other Important Conditions
6. Modes of Election
7. Exception to the Rules
8. Conclusion and Suggestion

Bibliography

3
4