LexSMT. NARESH KUMARI & ORS. versus SMT. CHAMELI & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 12 S.C.R. 693 : 2024 INSC 965 Smt. Naresh Kumari & Ors. v. Smt. Chameli & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 8244 of 2009) 11 December 2024 [Sudhanshu Dhulia* and Prasanna B. Varale, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the resumption of onerous gift to heirs of donor when conditions of gift are not fulfilled by heirs of the donee. Headnotes† Gift – Oral Gift – Resumption of onerous gift – Land gifted by donor to donee, duly executed and possession transferred – 45 years later, the plaintiffs-donor's heirs, filed suit for resumption of property claiming that gift was made in lieu of services to be rendered by donees and their heirs, to donors and their heirs lifelong, and since the defendants-donees stopped rendering these services, and original donees have died, suit land to revert to plaintiffs – Trial court decreed the suit holding that the subject matter of gift was only a life interest in suit land and since services had stopped the land was to be reverted in favour of plaintiffs – First Appellate Court upheld the same – High Court dismissed the suit, holding that it was not mentioned in the mutation that the donees had to serve the heirs of the donor as well and it could be presumed that proper services were rendered to donor during his lifetime, and the plaintiffs failed to disclose these services and when they were stopped – Interference: Held: Not called for – In case of resumption of land where there has been long and uninterrupted possession of defendants, strong evidence is required by plaintiffs seeking a decree of possession – Plaintiffs case not backed by any plausible evidence – Gift was for past services but even if it is assumed that it was for some past and some future services, no occasion for the defendants to render the services as the plaintiffs-appellants had left the village and now, when defendants have been enjoying peaceful possession of land for long, resumption of land in favour of appellants will not * Author 694 [2024] 12 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports be justified – There was only a vague and conclusory allegation that the defendants have discontinued to serve the successors of the donor-plaintiffs, without any evidence in support of the same – s.127 permits an onerous gift but a gift which is conditioned upon perpetual rendering of services without any remuneration would amount to a begar or forced labour, even slavery and thus, it is not just wrong or illegal but even unconstitutional, being violative of fundamental rights of the donees – This so-called rendering of services, was to be in perpetuity – Thus, the condition as is being read by the plaintiffs is nothing short of reading forced labour, as a condition – Meaningful and purposive interpretation is required – Thus, there was never such a condition of rendering continuous services in the gift deed and services here meant only the past services rendered by the donees to the donor, or at best it may include services to be rendered by the donees to the original donor, who passed away in the late 1950s – Gift had no condition of continuation of these services till perpetuity as the plaintiffs would like to read s.127 permitting onerous gifts was not in force as TPA not applicable in erstwhile Punjab – Nor can it be said that such condition being based on equity, justice and good conscience can be read into the gift deed as a valid condition – Stipulated condition of services and the continuation of the rendering of such services has to be read in the context when the deed was executed – Services shall be understood only as past services rendered, or at most, the services which had to be rendered by the original donees to the original donor during his lifetime – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – ss.126 and 127. [Paras 10-18] Case Law Cited Shivshankara v. H.P. Vedvyasa Char [2023] 6 SCR 359 : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 358; Chander Bhan v. Mukhtiar Singh [2024] 5 SCR 1148 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 761 – relied on. Forbes v. Meer Mahomed Tuquee, 1870 SCC OnLine PC 21; Partap Das v. Nand Singh, AIR 1924 Lah 729 (1); Captain Parmodh Singh v. Labh Singh, AIR 1955 P&H 49 – referred to. List of Acts Transfer of Property Act, 1882; Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act, 1953; Punjab Act No. 12 of 1950; Punjab Act No. 5 of 1951. [2024] 12 S.C.R. 695 Smt. Naresh Kumari & Ors. v. Smt. Chameli & Ors. List of Keywords English laws of equity; Onerous gift; Resumption of property; Condition
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.