1. The short question arising for decision in second appeal relates to the extent of the right, which Koshy took under a gift deed Ext. D-3, executed in his favour and in favour of his wife Achi and of their children, defendants 1 to 4 and deceased Pappi who were then unborn. The dispositive words in Ext. D-3 were;

These are sufficient to imply a gift in favour of their unborn children. If, as contended for the 4th defendant-appellant, the disposition in favour of the children was valid, Koshy took only an 1/ 7th share; if as contended for the respondents, the disposition in favour of unborn persons is void, Koshy's share is 1/2. The question for decision is whether a disposition by way of gift in favour of unborn persons is void or not. It was answered in favour of the respondents by the courts below.

2. S.122 of the Transfer of Property Act provides that a gift to be valid has to be accepted by the donee or on his behalf. Where there are more than one donee, the acceptance must be by all of them or on their behalf. This condition is impossible of compliance in the case of unborn donees. Moreover, being a 'transfer' it has to be only in favour of living persons. If a do