Ostensible Owner or Doctrine of Holding Out (Benami Ownership under TPA, 1882)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 ต.ค. 2024
- In this session I have tried to cover the concept of Ostensible Owner or Doctrine of Holding Out or Benami Ownership which is discussed under section 41 of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
One of the best law series lecture and I am appreciative of you Prof Poojari
Verry good explanation sir
Verey eassy wiring exam. This topic
wonderful lecture . Very clear voce i am very happy thank u very much
Thank u Sir for making this point so easy..doing self study.. Love from🇧🇩💚
It is very useful class for me for guiding me for all subject conversation in Tamil also...
Sir, you make it very easily understandable.🙏🙏
Really its to good to understand and very useful for examination
There was lot of confusion before coming to this lecture nd infact upto 2 slides I was not able to understand it........
Now after complete lecture everything is clr..... tq sir👏
Thank you so much sir🙏🙏 from Kerala
Video of sec.41 yet to complete but now i feel am comfortable with your expression and the way you explaining things with background picture. Very kind of you sir. God bless you. Can i get your number sir? ....happy dreams sir. Vanakkam🙏🍎
Awesome explanation sir👍
Ha ha ha example of Mr Shashi Tharoor 😃😃😃 nice video made by you 👌
i love the way u teach
keep up the gud work
God bless you
Sir ur smile is as lovely as your teaching
Thanks a lot sir very helpful lecture
thank you,i understood verywell plz continue this
You make the topic so easy to study
Thank you sooo much sir. Iam always thank to you♥️♥️
Good analysis.
Thanks for explaining in English only
Is there a link or copy judgement on “Luchmunn v/s Kallichuran (1873) 19 W.R. 192” that is mentioned in the video?
Thak u really ur explanation is excellent
Brilliant Sir!!!!
Very Helpful
Thanks for comment. Please share videos with your friends ☺️😊
Sir, may I mention a little bit of error ? that's Bunnoo Bibee was wife of Alexander and Macqueen was daughter of Alexander, during the lecture, you mentioned Macqueen as wife of Alexander.
Ranjit Basfor, Guwahati, Assam.
Very nicely presented..well done.
Continue your career for all legal subjects...
Good video sir.. please do more videos on tranfer of property act
Very simple and quite helpful
Awesome video
Better then others.
Shashi Tharoor punch was lit 💥.
😊
Even i doubt Shashi Tharoor would have given such tough words :D
👏👏👏 ☺️😊👌
Can you do video on doctrine of lis pendence u/s 52 & doctrine of part performance u/s 53A
Great effort
Sir i have a qestion if husband purchase a property on the name of wife she became ostensible owener but the possession is under the husband then can wife sell that property and can it become a valid trasfer?
Good lecture sir
A brings his horse and B his tonga and they ply it and divide the income everyday. Are they partners?
Please reply..
Very well done sir
Please make a video about 53 and 53A .I need it very badly
U r gem❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Thanks a lot
Wonderful explanation sir
Always smiling
Gives us positive vibes to study
And makes tough topics easy❤️
Sir....plz can you put a video doctrine of lis pendens in transfer of property act....mu semester exams is coming soon .....I always follows your video to clarify my doubts ....I can't find out the exact explanation in others video
Sir please cover all the topics in property law
Sir this is mains question please tell me which provision will be explained in this question from transfer of property act. The question is
Where there is no gift but a direction to transfer from and after a given event, the vesting will be postponed till after that event has happened, " Are there exceptions of this rule? Explain
Sir a doubt in requirements point 2 there should be consent from real owner but in mc donald case there was no consent from husband no sir?
Superb
Very helpful sir....
Very useful class sir
Sir, in this in whose name the agreement of property lies?
Sir you explained it very well..🙏🙏
❤️🔥
Sir under ram kumar vs MC queen case the sale was valid without the consent of mc Donald
But under requirements u said that consent must be there
Can u pls clarify on this?
Its great
Great
Nice sir
Good...explanation....
Mr. ganesh poojary ji its more help full if you use Hindi language and cartoons to make better uderstanding undoutedly ur teaching is amazing
This is a English Channel and my Hindi is poor
Thanks a lots sir
Thank you so much.
Sir can you please explain Doctrine of Priority sec 48 of TP Act
Will try sometime
sir u have wrongly mentioned that mr. donald purchased a property in mr. donald name... i think it should be mrs. donald name..
Put videos to Evidence Act .... Please sir
🙏👌👏
Sooppr sir
Sir make video for Section 43 to 53
Will try
Easement pe video plzz to make
😮😮😮
Valid
sir kindly minimize your picture as it is hiding the slides
What is so difficult about the word
" ostensible " ? Is it not another word for " apparent " ? " Ostensible" appears to be more attractive ! That's all.
Sir no match