Goyal v Chandra

In the case of Goyal v Chandra, the primary issue was the severance of a joint tenancy in land held under the Torrens system and the impact of an agreement not to sever on the transfer of one party's interest. The dispute came before the Family Court, where the court was asked to decide whether the agreement not to sever was void as a restraint on alienation and to determine the effect of such an agreement on the transfer of one joint tenant's interest to themselves as a tenant-in-common.

The legal issues that the court had to resolve included the enforceability of the agreement not to sever joint tenancy, and whether such an agreement voided the transfer of a joint tenant's interest to themselves as a tenant-in-common. Additionally, the court needed to consider the implications of the Family Law Act 1975 in relation to an interlocutory application seeking to restrain the severance of joint tenancy, particularly in light of the potential for adjustive property proceedings after death.

The court concluded that the agreement not to sever did not render the transfer void, and therefore, the equitable joint tenancy was not severed. The court found that the transfer was effective, but it did not sever the equitable joint tenancy due to the obligation not to sever. Furthermore, the court held that an injunction to restrain severance would be futile because the survivor and the estate could still pursue adjustive property proceedings after death under section 79(8) of the Family Law Act 1975. Consequently, the court determined that the interlocutory application was ineffective in this context.

The final orders of the court affirmed that the transfer of interest did not sever the equitable joint tenancy, and the agreement not to sever remained binding. The court also dismissed the interlocutory application as futile due to the ability to pursue property adjustments post-mortem.