Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
HONBLE JUSTICE R. W. JOSHI
Sheikh Ibrahim S/o Mohammad Sheikh – Appellant
Versus
Sheikh Rehman S/o Mohammad Sheikh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
1. This appeal is preferred by the original defendant Nos.1 to 6 who has suffered a decree of possession in the suit filed by the respondent-sole. The plaintiff claims his ownership over the suit property on the basis of Hiba in his favour by his father on 11/06/2005. Thereafter, oral gift dated 11/06/2005 is reduced into writing on 12/06/2005. The father is arrayed as defendant in the suit. The father has supported the case of the plaintiff in his written statement. It is not the contention of defendant Nos.1 to 6, that the written statement was filed by his father under the influence of plaintiff. The learned Trial Court has accepted the case of oral gift i.e. Hiba by father defendant No.7 in favour of the plaintiff and has accordingly passed a decree for possession in favour of the plaintiff. The defendant Nos.1 to 6 challenged the said decree by filing first appeal bearing Regular Civil Appeal No.262/2019 which is also dismissed vide Judgment and Decree dated 28/03/2022. The present second appeal is preferred against these concurrent Judgments and Decrees.
2. Shri M.R. Joharapurkar, learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the evidence on
Constructive possession suffices for the validity of a Hiba under Muslim law, and actual physical possession is not required.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the execution of gift deeds in accordance with the law, including the need for delivery of possession for a valid gift.
Under the proviso, the Court should be "satisfied" that the case involves a "substantial question of law" and not a mere "question of law
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for proper endorsement on stamp papers for oral gift memorandums and the significance of possession and documentary evidence in ....
A gift under Mohammedan law requires explicit acceptance and possession; failure to prove these elements results in denial of ownership claims.
(1) Status of relationship – Opinion evidence – It is open to Supreme Court to interfere with findings of fact given by High Court if High Court has acted perversely or otherwise improperly.(2) Perce....
The court established that an oral gift requires clear proof of declaration, acceptance, and delivery of possession to be valid, which was not met in this case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
