SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Narula, J.
Nitin Mehta - Appellant
Versus
Suresh Mehta - Respondent
CS(OS) 2895 of 2011 & I.A. 2481 of 2012
Decided On : 17-12-2019




The validity of a gift deed is affirmed when executed and registered according to law, establishing ownership without the necessity of immediate physical possession transfer.

Headnote:(A) Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 122 and 123 - Suit for possession, mandatory injunction, and mesne profits - Plaintiff claims exclusive ownership of the suit property, supported by a valid gift deed executed by proforma Defendant No. 2 - Defendant No. 1 contests ownership and asserts rights based on alleged contributions and family arrangements - The court finds the gift deed valid and establishes that Defendant No. 1 has no legal interest in the property, leading to a decree for possession and mesne profits. (Paras 9, 40, 41, 43)

(B) Gift Deed - Requirements for legal and valid gift deed discussed including registration and acceptance by the donee - The retention of property by the donor does not negate the validity of the gift.

Findings of Court:
The registered gift deed is valid and has been effectively executed, transferring ownership to the Plaintiff, with the donor retaining only the rights of residence. Defendant No. 1's claims based on alleged joint family property and contributions are unsupported by evidence.

Issues: The court addressed the validity of the gift deed, rights of Defendant No. 1, and whether the suit was premature.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concludes that mere contributions do not confer ownership without a valid deed; the gift deed transfers ownership as of its execution.

Result: Decree of possession granted in favor of Plaintiff and liability for mesne profits established for Defendant No. 1.

Table of Content
1. plaintiff claims possession of property. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. defendant contests ownership of property. (Para 5 , 18 , 19 , 23 , 24)
3. court's analysis on validity of gift deed. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 14 , 20 , 26)
4. no huf exists; contributions do not confer ownership. (Para 12 , 15 , 27 , 28)
5. plaintiff entitled to possession and mesne profits. (Para 36 , 39 , 42)
6. final decree granted with specified relief. (Para 43 , 44)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. By way of the present suit, Plaintiff seeks possession, mandatory injunction and mesne profits in respect of first floor of property bearing No. B-97, Defence Colony, New Delhi comprising of three bedroom, attached bathroom, drawing-dining room, kitchen and one room above the garage (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property").

Case of the Plaintiff

2. The Plaintiff claims to be sole, legal and exclusive owner of the suit property. Defendant No. 1 is the maternal uncle; and Defendant No. 2 is maternal grandfather of the Plaintiff. No relief has been sought against Defendant No. 2, who has been arrayed as a pro-forma Defendant.

3. On 25th May 1953, as part of resettlement policy, a plot of land bearing no, B-97, Defence Colony, New Delhi admeasuring 271 sq mtrs., was allotted to proforma Defendant No. 2 on lease-basis by Ministry of Defence, Resettlement Section. Proforma Defendant No. 2 constructed a house on the said plot from his own funds by way of raising loan from Government of India. For this purpose, mortgage deed dated 16th September 1961 was executed. The loan was repaid and deed of re-conveyance was signed on 25th March 1971. The land was thereafter converted from leasehold to freehold on 12th March 1997. In 1994, Defendant No. 1 quoting strenuous financial conditions, requested Defendant No. 2 for permission to reside in the suit property. In this manner, Defendant No. 1, as a son, was granted a license to reside in the suit property, under an oral arrangement, purely as a permissive user. Defendant No. 1 time and again assured proforma Defendant No. 2 that he would vacate and handover the possession of the suit property immediately on demand being made by Defendant No. 2 and recognized his ownership and possessory rights in respect of the suit property. In the meantime, Defendant No. 2, out of love and affection, transferred all his rights, title and interest in the suit property in favour of the Plaintiff, vide registered gift deed dated 23rd May 2011, duly registered with the Sub Registrar vide registration No. 7618 in book No. 1, volume No. 11161 on pages No. 47 to 51 on 26th May 2011. Defendant No. 1 gained knowledge of the said transfer as he was informed about the same by Defendant No. 2 as well as the Plaintiff. In furtherance to the gift deed, Defendant No. 2 also executed in favour of the Plaintiff, an affidavit, thereby declaring that the Plaintiff can get the suit property mutated in his own name in the municipal records. During the course of time, behavior of Defendant No. 1 worsened and, as a result Defendant No. 2 requested him to leave the property and handover peaceful and vacant possession of the suit property. The request was declined and he kept dilly-dallying the matter on one pretext or the other and continues to be in possession of the suit property, save one room above the garage which has been rented out by the Plaintiff vide rent agreement dated 8th October 2011. Plaintiff as the legal owner of the suit property, has been requesting Defendant No. 1 to vacate the same but such requests have not yielded any favorable result. On the contrary, Defendant No. 1 has advanced threat to life and property of Defendant No. 2 and the Plaintiff.

4. Defendant No. 2 issued a public notice in the newspaper `Times of India' whereby, he disowned, disclaimed and renounced Defendant No. 1 as his son and also filed a complaint dated 7th September 2011 before the SHO, Defence Colony, narrating the illegal threats extended by Defendant N

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top