MERE RIGHT OF RE-ENTRY

& EASEMENT APART FROM

DOMINANT HERITAGE

NAME : DIGAJ BENE

CLASS : SYBALLB
ROLLNO. : 190010
TRANSFERABILITY OF PROPERTY

• For a valid transfer of property, the property must be a transferable property.

• As a general rule, property of every kind may be transferred. But, there are
certain kinds of properties the transfer of which is not allowed under the law.
Such properties are called non transferable properties.
 SECTION 6
• It specifically speaks about, what
may be transferred. Property of
any kind may be transferred,
except as otherwise provided by
this act or even by any other law
for time being in force, and these
exceptions will be discussed in
detail in the following sub-
sections.
NON – TRANSFERABLE UNDER
SECTION 6

• Clause (b) Mere Right of Re-entry

The right of re-entry means the right to resume the possession of the land which
would have been given to some other person for a certain period of time. And the
cases of re-entry are usually seen in the cases of leases, which would empower
the lessor to re-enter upon the demised premises if the rent is in arrear for a
certain period or if there is a breach of covenants in the lease.
• CLAUSE (C) : EASEMEMNT OF DOMINANT
HERITAGE
• An easement can be quoted as a right which the owner or the occupier of
certain land has in his possession for the beneficial enjoyment of the said land,
or it may even be to do, or to continue to do something or to prevent
something from being done. This very concept of easement includes under its
ambit an important principle of ‘profits a pendre’, which actually means– A
right to enjoy the benefits arising out of the land
• Example: Where A as an owner has the right of way over the way of the land
of another for purposes which are connected with the beneficial use of his own
land then, this can be termed as an easement
CASES

Faquir Chand v. Sri Ram Rattan Bhanot

• Under the terms of the lease given by the Delhi Improvement Trust, the building erected on
the land was to be used for residential purpose only and if it was used for any other purpose
without approval of the lessor, the lease would become void. The landlord in violation of the
terms of the lease, let out the building for commercial purpose. The Delhi Development
Authority being the successor of the original lessor gave notice to the landlord that since the
building was not permitted to be used for commercial purposes, the lease was liable to be
terminated. It was held by the Supreme Court that the policy of the legislature, which enjoined
that no person shall convert a residential building into a non-residential building except with
the permission of the Rent Controller,[17] was put to end unauthorised use of the leased lands,
rather than merely to enable the authorities to get back possession of the leased lands. The
lease is not forfeited in such cases merely because the building put upon the leased land is put
to unauthorised use.
Re Davis and Company
• in this case, A purchased certain goods from B, which was on a hire purchase
agreement. This agreement contained a clause which was that after purchase,
A would take the property and would also pay the instalments on time, and in
case A fails to pay the instalments B would enter A’s premise and take the
possession of the property. The important point to be noted here is that the
right to Re-enter is a personal right of B and the same cannot be transferred by
him, and in any case, if he transfers this right to entry, to his creditors or
anyone, then the same would be void.
Thank You