Tarun has two properties, Property-X and Property-Y. He sells his Property-Y to Jolly and puts a condition that Jolly should not construct more than one storey on Property-Y so that Property-X, which he retains, shall ha

The Condition imposed by Mr. Tarun is valid under the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Here Mr. Tarun has imposed condition for the benefit of another property 'Y', He Can do so. There are certain "restraints" that have been declared 'Valid' by the courts. Section 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 embodies a rule which is based on the principle that restraint on the enjoyment of the property is invalid. The section lays down that where land is transferred by one to another, the transferor should not impose conditions as to how and in what manner the transferee should enjoy the property. Section 12 also makes the transfer void if a property is transferred to any person adding a condition that if such person becomes insolvent he ceases to hold that property. Such a condition is not recognised as valid in law. Again, this is subject to the exception that if a landlord leases his property he can impose a condition on the lessee that if the lessee becomes insolvent the lease should come to an end. Thus, it is clear in this case that the condition which is imposed by Tarun is for the benefit of another property which he retains. Such a condition is valid.