Question Description
Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The Transfer of Property Act (hereinafter mentioned as TOPA, 1882) was enacted in the year 1882 to regulate the process of transferring of property and various other conditions associated with it. Section 6 of the Act states that property of any kind may be transferred, except as otherwise provided by this Act or by any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, this provision of the Act deals with the demarcation between transferable and non-transferable property. This section has 9 sub clauses, each of which explains the different kinds of transfer of property that can be transferred. Everything else according to the Act can be legally transferred in various means and forms. Property here also means ownership.The first of these, Section 6(a) titled Spes Succession clause provides that such a property cannot be transferred if there is chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate, a chance of a relation obtaining a legacy on the death of kinsman or any other mere possibility of a like nature.Section 6(b) provides that a mere right of re-entry for breach of a condition subsequent cannot be transferred to anyone except the owner of the property affected thereby. The right of re-entry being a mere incident of the rights of the owner in leased premises, its transfer is prohibited by Law.Section 6(e) provides that a mere right to sue cannot be transferred. The word "mere" implies that the transferee acquires no interest in the subject of transfer other than the right to sue as an ostensible owner of the property claimed of which, it may be, the real owner is somebody else. However, property with an incidental right to sue for damages may be transferred.Section 6(h) provides that transfer of any property that can lead to an act that is against the interest affected thereby, or for committing an act that is for an unlawful object or consideration, or when is transferred to someone who is legally disqualified to be a transferee, then such transfer shall be deemed to be invalid.Q.Three men obtained a huge sum of money after committing fraud through an insurance scheme. They enter into an agreement to divide it among themselves. The third man does not get his share. He claims that the property was transferred as soon as the amount was obtained. Decide.a)The transfer of property is valid and he can exercise his right to claim it.b)This is a case of fraud and they must be tried under Torts.c)The third man has no right.d)None of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.