Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 3349 = 1975 SLD 3349 = 1975 PLD 1090
Lahore High Court
Letters Patent Appeal No. 535 of 1966, decided on 16th June 1975.
Presented By: Mushtaq Hussain and A. R. Sheikh, JJ
  Ras Tariq Bajwa for Appellants.   Qaisar Mustafa for
Respondents.  

Mian JINDA AND ANOTHER-Appellants

VERSUS

Haji GHULAM MUHAMMAD (REPRESENTED BY HEIRS)---Respondent

Law:

Section:

Muhammadan Law Gift-Essentials : (i) declaration, (ii) acceptance and (iii) delivery of possession-Gift subject to condition--Such condition void-Gift by father in favour of sons under registered gift deed-Property subject of gift already mortgaged at time of gift-Mortgage though possessory, yet mortgagor remaining in possession as tenant under mortgagee--Mere fact' that actual possession was not delivered, held, does not make gift invalid in circumstances-Gift of equity of redemption being valid such gift cannot be revoked. It is essential to the validity of a gift that there should be declaration of gift by the donor, an acceptance of the gift express or implied on behalf of the donee and delivery of possession of the subject of the gift by the donor to the donee as the subject of the gift is susceptible of. When a gift is made subject to a condition which derogates from the completeness of the grant, the condition is void and the gift will take effect as if no condition were attached to it. A gift may be made by a mortgagor of his equity of redemption and if it can be shown that the donor has divested himself completely of ownership and dominion over the equity of redemption, no valid exception can be taken to such a gift. What is the nature of delivery of possession of equity of redemption is a question of fact in each case and no hard and fast rule can be laid down. The gift of equity of redemption having been complete and the appellants-donees being related to the respondent-donor within the prohibited degree because had either of them been of opposite sex marriage in between them would have been void, even the revocation of the gift is of no avail to the respondent. Sadik Husain Khan v. Hashim Ali Khan and others 43 I A 212 iMullick Abdool Guffoor v. Muleka I L R 10 Cal. 1112 ; Chaudhri Mehdi Hasan and others v. Muhammad Hasan 33 I A 68 ; Tara Prasanna Sen v. Shandi Bibi I L R 49 Cal. 68 ; Anwar! Begum v. Nizam-ud-Din Shah I L R 21 All. 165 ; Mulla's Muhammadan Law, 17th Edn., para. 145, Art. 167 and Tyabji's Muhammadan Law, 3rd Edn., para. 370 ref.   Dates of hearing : 29th and 30th October 1974.          …
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register