Official Assignee Madras v Sampath Naidu
Rule established
S.43 requires transferee to have acted in good faith; if transferee knew transferor had no title, S.43 does not protect
Facts
- Transferor represented having title; transferred for consideration
- Transferee was aware that transferor had no title at the time
- Transferor later acquired title; transferee claimed benefit of S.43
Issue
- Whether S.43 requires the transferee to have acted in good faith.
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. The doctrine protects only the innocent, not the colluding.
Ratio Decidendi
S.43 is an equitable doctrine based on estoppel. Estoppel protects those who are misled, not those who participate in the deception. Knowledge of the defect = no protection.
How to use it in an exam
Cite to establish the good faith requirement in S.43. Key line: "S.43 protects only the innocent transferee, not one who knew of the defective title."
Source
Source: AIR 1933 Madras 795
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.
Cited in study notes
Doctrine of Feeding the Grant by EstoppelS.43: good faith requirement