RENIKUNTLA RAJAMMA (D) BY LRS. versus K. SARWANAMMA

Citation: [2014] 8 S.C.R. 890 · Decided: 17-07-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: T.S. THAKUR · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2014] 8 S.C.R. 890 
RENIKUNTLA RAJAMMA (D) BY LRS. 
v. 
K. SARWANAMMA 
(Civil Appeal No.4195 of 2008) 
JULY 17, 2014 
[T.S. THAKUR, V. GOPALA GOWDA AND 
C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] 
. 
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - ss. 122 and 123 -
C 
Interpretation of - Gift reserving life interest for the donor -
Validity - Whether retention of possession of the gifted 
property for enjoyment by the donor during her life time and 
the right to receive the rents of the property in any way affected 
the validity of the gift - Held: A conjoint reading of ss. 122 and 
D 
123 of the Act makes it abundantly clear that "transfer. of 
possession" of the property covered by the registered 
instrument of the gift duly signed by the donor and attested 
as required is not a sine qua non for the making of a valid 
gift under the provisions of the Act ~ s. 123 having overriding 
E 
effect on the rules of Hindu Law pertaining to gift including 
the rule that required possession of the property gifted to be 
given to the donee - Language employed in s. 129 before its 
amendment clear enough to give s.123 an overriding effect 
vis-a-vis rules of Hindu Law - If the intention of thfr legislature 
F 
was to make delivery of possession of the property gifted also 
as a condition precedent for a valid gift, the provision could 
and indeed would have specifically said so - Absence of any 
such requirement can only lead to the conclusion that delivery 
of possession is not an essential prerequisite for the making 
G of a valid gift in the case of immovable property - On facts, 
the recitals in the gift deed proved transfer of absolute title in 
the gifted property from the donor to the donee - What was 
retained was only the right to use the property during the 
lifetime of the donor which did not in any way affect the transfer 
H 
890 
RENIKUNTLA RAJAMMA (0) BY LRS. v. K. 
891 
SARWANAMMA 
of ownership in favour of the donee by the donor - High Court A 
justified in refusing to interfere with the decree passed in 
favour of the donee. 
The true and correct interpretation of Sections 122 
and 123 of The Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was in issue 8 
in the present appeal. 
The question which arose for consideration before 
this Court was whether retention of possession of the 
gifted property for enjoyment by the donor during her life 
time and the right to receive the rents of the property in C 
any way affected the validity of the gift. 
The appellant contended that a conditional gift was 
not envisaged by the provisions of the Transfer of 
Property Act; and inasmuch as on facts, the gift deed in o 
question failed to transfer, title, possession and the right 
to deal with the property in absolute terms in favour of 
the donee, the same was no gift in the eyes of law. 
Per contra, on behalf of the respondents it was 
contended that transfer of possession was a condition E 
under the Hindu Law for a valid gift which Rule of Hindu 
Law stood superseded by Section 123 of The Transfer of 
Property Act. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
F 
HELD:1.1. Chapter VII of the Transfer of Property Act, 
1882 deals with gifts generally and, inter alia, provides for 
the mode of making gifts. Section 122 of the Act defines 
'gift' as a transfer of certain existing movable or G 
immovable property made voluntarily and without 
consideration by one person called the donor to another 
called the donee and accepted by or on behalf of the 
donee. In order to constitute a valid gift, acceptance must, 
according to this provision, be made during the life time 
H 
892 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 8 S.C.R. 
A 
of the donor and while he is still capable of giving. It 
stipulates that a gift is void if the donee dies before 
acceptance. Section 123 regulates mode of making a' gift 
and, inter alia, provides that a gift of immovable property 
must be effected by a registered instrument signed by or 
B 
on behalf of the donor and attested by at least two 
witnesses. In the case of movable property, transfer either 
by a registered instrument signed as aforesaid or by 
delivery is valid under Section 123. [Paras 9, 10) [899-H; 
900-A-C] 
c 
1.2. Se~tion 123 leaves no manner of doubt that a gift 
of immovable property can be made by a registered 
instrument singed by or on behalf of the donor and 
attested by at least two witnesses. When read with 
Section 122 of the Act, a gift made by a registered 
D instrument duly signed by or on behalf of the donor and 
attested by at least 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.