JUDGMENT - (1) In both these second appeals a common question of law arises and that question is whether a gift by a grandfather to his minor grandsons of immovable property can be said to be complete where the delivery of possession is accepted on behalf of the minors not by their father but by their mother.

(2) It has been held by the lower Appelate Court that in such circumstances the gift cannot be regarded as complete. It seems to me that the viw taken by the lower appellate Court is supported by the decisions in Musa Miya v. KadarBuz. ILR 52 Bom 316 and in Suma Meah v. S.A.S. Pillai, AIR 1933 Rang be held that there was no necessity of transfer of possession to the father of the donees who was their natural and therefore their legal guardian.155.The first mentioned decisioon is of the Privy Council.in that case, as in the present case, the father of the moiinors was alive and was actually living with his wife and children in the house of a donor, who was the paternal grandfather of the donees. It was held that the father was in a position to excersise his rights and powers as parent and guardian and to take possession according to Mahomedan law and the donor continued to be in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document