A valid gift under Mahomedan Law requires (1) a declaration of gift by the donor, (2) acceptance of the gift express or implied, by or on behalf of the donee, and (3) delivery of such possession of the subject of the gift by the donor to the donees as the subject of the gift is susceptible of.

NATESAN, J. :- This appeal arises out of a suit for partition of the estate of one Haji Mohamed Asamathulla Radsha Sahib who died on 4-1-1955 at Madras leaving several heirs and considerable movable and immovable properties at Madras and in Arcot, North Aruot District. The plaintiff is one of the daughters of the deceased by his second wife, Habeebunnisssa Begum, whom he had divorced in 1948. The first defendant is another daughter by this divorced wife and defendants 2 and 3 are sons of the deceased by her. The fourth defendant in the suit is a daughter of the deceased by his first wife who died somewhere in 1938 and defendants 9 to 11 are the daughters of the fourth defendant and minors.

The fifth defendant is the third wife of the deceased and the sixth defendant is the minor daughter by the third wife. Defendants 7 and 8 are the 4th and fifth wives of the deceased and they have no issues. The dispute in the appeal relates to (1) interests shown as owned by the 6th defendant Guilzar in Gulzar and Co., Arcot, valued at about Rs. 15,000; (2) amounts credited in favour of defendants 9 to 11 in the said firm totalling about Rs. 7,000 and (3) a sum of about Rs. 16,000 cash, found in the iron-safe at No. 40, Mahmood Shah Bazar, Arcot, when an inventory was taken on 11-1-1955. The said house at Arcot with the movable properties therein valued at Rs. 2,000 had been gifted by the deceased to the minor Gulzar by a registered gift deed Ex. B-1 on 29-3-1951. It is the contention of the plaintiff that the amount and investment in Gulzar and Co. in the name of the sixth defendant and minor defendants 9 to 11 really belonged to the estate of the deceased, that there are mere book entries made benami and that the amounts are available for division among. the legal heirs of the deceased. On behalf of the sixth defendant and defendants 9 to 11, contra, it is contended that these entries represent completed gift duly accepted on behalf of the minor, and that the said amounts belong to the respective parties and cannot be brought into the general pool for division among the heirs of the deceased. The learned Assistant City Civil Judge rejected the plaintiff's contentions, holding that there was inherent evidence in the book entries relating to the amounts, that Azamatullah relinquished his control over the moneys and divested himself completely of his beneficial interest therein and there was evidence of acceptance of the gift on behalf of the donees. As regards the acceptance of the gift on behalf of the donees, there was no difficulty so far as minor Gulzar was concerned, because the donor was her father. In regard to minor defendants 9 to 11, they had their father and the learned Judge found the validity of the gift holding that there was acceptance of the gift by Azamathulla as de facto guardian of the minors without opposition from the father of the minors who was the legal guardian. The learned City Civil Judge also upheld the contention of the sixth defendant that cash of Rs. 16,000 found in the iron-safe had also been gifted by the deceased to Gulzar.

2. We shall first take up for consideration the credits in favour of minor Gulzar and minor defendants 9 to 11 in the firm of Gulzar and Co. The credits in Gulzar and Co. have come on transfer from the tannery business which Azamatullah had been carrying on. It is seen from the records that the amounts in favour of his three granddaughters, that is defendants 9 to 11, and Gulzar on the 31st March 1949, Rs. 2,000 for each of the three granddaughters and Rs. 5,000 for his minor daughter. Gulzar. Ex. B-3 is the day-book of the tannery business for the year 1948-49. The entries have been made by Azamatullah himself, the deceased debiting himself a sum of Rs. 11,000 in all and Crediting his daughter and the grand-daughters as aforesaid. The credits are found carried forward in the accounts of the tannery business in the subsequent years and interest is charged and credited. The partners