The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with the essential requirements for a valid gift under Mohammedan Law, the implications of the content of a gift deed on an alleged oral gift, and the relevance of specific legal provisions, including the Transfer of Property Act, Shariat Act of 1937, and Registration Act, in determining the validity of a gift deed.

N.K. Mehrotra, J.

This is second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 2.8.1980 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Faizabad upholding the judgment and decree dated 6.11.1978 passed by Civil Judge, Faizabad.

2. I have heard Shri Molul, Arif Khan, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Abid Ali for the respondent No. 1.

3. It appears from the facts on record that Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon plaintiff-respondent No. 1 filed suit against Usman, Abo Mohammad (deceased appellant No. 1) and Mashooq Ali (deceased appellant No. 2) with the allegations that house No. 2868 situated in Mohalla Hayat Ganj in Tanda. District Faizabad was the property of late Abdul Haq @ Hukka who died on 24.1.1972. The only son of Abdul Haq @ Hukka left India for Pakistan leaving Abdul Haq alone, in Tanda, District Faizabad. It is alleged that there was none in Tanda to look after him. Hazi Madari the father of Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon, the plaintiff-respondent was a close friend and neighbour of Abdul Haq. Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon used to look after Abdul Haq and used to spend money for his services. It is further alleged that about seven years before the filing of the suit on the occasion of ld. Abdul Haq on being pleased from the services of Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon made oral gift of the house in suit in favour of the plaintiff-respondent Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon which was accepted by her and he handed over possession to Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon over that house. Since then Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon was living in the house of Abdul Haq and was looking after him also. In the southern portion of the house, there were tenants. They were making payment of rent to Abdul Haq but after the alleged oral gift, Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon was realising the rent from them as owner of those shops. After about one year before the death, Abdul Haq felt apprehension that after his death, some other person may disturb the possession of the plaintiff, hence, as an evidence of oral gift, he executed a written deed of gift in favour of the plaintiff. Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon even after the death of Abdul Haq continued to be in possession of that house. It is alleged that within one month from the date of death of Abdul Haq, the defendants dishonestly moved an application u/s 145, Cr. P.C. before S.D.M.. Tanda with an intention to evict the plaintiff from that house. The plaintiff-respondent Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon filed a suit for declaration that she was owner and in possession of the house in suit. During the pendency of the suit, the defendants took possession over the house in pursuance of the release order passed by the S.D.M. on 12.4.1975. Thereafter, the plaintiff amended the plaint and sought the relief of possession also.

4. It is admitted to the defendant that Abdul Haq was the owner in possession of the house in suit. They denied that Abdul Haq had any son living in Pakistan. They denied the oral gift by Abdul Haq in favour of Smt. Rasheeda Khatoon seven years before the institution of the suit. They also denied the execution of the alleged gift deed in favour of the plaintiff. It is contended that Abdul Haq had three daughters namely Mussammat Khairulnissa, Qamrulnissa alias Kumul and Jauharulnissa. Mussammat Khairulnissas died during the life time of Abdul Haq leaving behind Mohd. Ayub, Moinduddin, Mohd. Yaseen and Sagir as sons. Defendant No. 1 is the son of Jauharulinissa. After the death of Abdul Haq, Mst. Khairulnissa, and Jauharulnissa and sons of Khairulnissa were the owner in possession of the house in suit. Mst. Jauhirulnissa and Usman were looking after Abdul Haq. Abdul Haq had given the western shop of the house to the son of the defendant No. 2 which was fallen down. After the death of Abdul Haq, the defendant No. 2 constructed that shop with the permission of defendant No. 1 on the condition that the shop shall be let out to him. Subsequently, Jauhirulnissa executed a sale deed on 8.3.1972 and Usman and Rauf executed a sale deed on 31.3.1972 in respect of the h