Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Sections 122 & 126 — Registered gift settlement deed — Unilateral revocation by donor — Validity — Gift once complete and accepted becomes irrevocable except in circumstances contemplated under Section 126.
Where the donor executed a registered gift settlement deed reserving only life interest for herself and conveying vested remainder rights in favour of the donee, and the deed contained no condition permitting revocation, unilateral cancellation by execution of a revocation deed before the Sub-Registrar was held void, non-est and unenforceable. The Court reiterated that a completed gift cannot be revoked at the mere will and pleasure of the donor unless there exists an agreed condition attracting Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act.
— Paras 17 to 21, 31 to 33.
Gift Settlement Deed — Reservation of life interest by donor — Effect — Valid completed transfer.
The Court held that reservation of life interest in favour of donor does not invalidate or postpone completion of gift. Delivery of possession during donor’s lifetime is not sine qua non for validity of a registered gift settlement deed where vested remainder rights are created in favour of donee.
— Paras 17 & 32.
Section 126, Transfer of Property Act — Revocation of gift — Requirement of express condition or mutual agreement.
In absence of any recital in the gift settlement deed requiring donee to maintain donor or permitting revocation on failure of maintenance, donor cannot subsequently plead oral understanding and unilaterally cancel the gift. Existence of condition precedent or subsequent must be established by evidence.
— Paras 17 to 20 & 33.
Registration Act, 1908 — Power of Sub-Registrar — Cancellation/revocation of registered gift deed — Jurisdiction lacking.
The High Court reiterated that the Sub-Registrar has no authority to entertain or register unilateral cancellation/revocation deeds cancelling completed registered conveyances/gift settlement deeds. Cancellation of a registered document can be effected only through decree of competent civil court. Consequently, the unilateral revocation deed and its registration were held wholly void and meaningless transactions.
— Paras 26 to 31 & 33.
Gift deed — Acceptance by donee — Proof — Admission by donor sufficient.
Execution and acceptance of gift settlement deed stood proved where donor herself admitted execution in revocation deed and one of the attesting witnesses to the gift deed was examined. Once acceptance is established, gift becomes complete and enforceable.
— Paras 19 & 32.
Subsequent sale deed executed after unilateral revocation — Validity — Purchaser acquires no title.
Since donor had already divested herself of title under the earlier registered gift settlement deed and retained only life interest without power of alienation, subsequent sale deed executed in favour of third party after unilateral cancellation conveyed no valid title.
— Paras 28 & 33.
Limitation — Suit for declaration and recovery of possession — Cause of action arising on execution of subsequent sale deed — Suit within limitation.
Where plaintiff filed suit immediately after acquiring knowledge of subsequent sale deed executed by donor in favour of third party purchaser, the suit seeking declaration of title and recovery of possession was held within limitation.
— Para 19.
Second Appeal — Section 100 CPC — Concurrent findings of fact — Interference impermissible absent substantial question of law.
The High Court reiterated that under Section 100 CPC, interference with concurrent findings of fact recorded by Courts below is impermissible unless substantial question of law arises. Mere reappreciation of evidence cannot constitute substantial question of law.
— Paras 14 to 16 & 35.
No comments:
Post a Comment