Skip to main content

Gift under Transfer OF Property Act

 Gift under Transfer of property Act


Section 122 to section 129 talks about the concept of gift under Transfer of property act 1882

Concept of gift

The one who gives the gift is known as donor well the one who receives the gift is known as Donee .

Here, the donor can gift any movable or immovable property.For example ,in case of movable property a person can gift car and in case of immovable property a person can gift A house.The essential of this concept is that thr Donee does not have to give any consideration to the donor while receiving any such property.Transfer of any movable or immovable property out of affection and voluntary act , The act should not be influenced, forced.

Section 122 clearly mentions about existing movable or immovable property which means the property which can be gifted should be present and it cannot be dependent on a future or upcoming property..

In the case of Phulchand v. Lakhu The gift was made under influence and this was not valid

There should be no consideration from donee  to the donor.


Acceptance of gift

When the gift is being given both the donor and donee should be alive or living. The donor should be alive while giving the gift and the donee should be alive while receiving the gift. The donor should be of sound mind while giving the gift but the donee can receive gift even if it is a mentally retarded person.

Important- if the donee dies before acceptance, the gift is void.


Section 123 - transfer how affected

Section 123 talks about how is gift transferred ,

In case of immovable property

There should be a registered instrument duly signed by the donor or somebody on behalf of the donor along with attested by minimum two witnesses.

In case of movable property

There is no compulsion that it needs to be registered, it can just be delivered to the Person who is receiving it.

Such delivery may be made in the same way as goods sold may be delivered.


Caselaw - 

Kalyana Sundaram v. Krupa Moopanar

It was held that The gift becomes valid as soon as the Donee accepts it.

 

Section 124 

This section speaks about a valid and void gift.

Any gift which is existing would be valid while gift of future property would be void..

If a transaction is having both existing and future property then the existing property would be considered valid while the future property would be considered void.


Section 125

If a gift is made to 2 or more persons in this case people who accepts the gift would account as valid while for those who didn’t accept the gift it would be considered void.

Section 126- revocation of suspension of a gift.

If there is a agreement between the donor and the donee that during the occurrence of a specific event The transaction of gift can be suspended or revoked and such transaction is not dependent on the will of the donor. In such case a gift can be suspended or revoked.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more