The essentials of a valid gift under Muslim law require declaration, acceptance, and transfer of possession, and a party's withdrawal of a partition suit does not bar filing a new suit for the same.

JUDGMENT:

(Per Hon’ble Dr. Justice G. Radha Rani)

This appeal is filed by the appellants-defendants No.6 and 8 aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 15.06.2016 passed in O.S. No.19 of 2003 by the IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad.

2. The parties are hereinafter referred to as arrayed before the trial Court.

3. The plaintiff filed a suit for partition and separate possession as party-in-person submitting that his father late Dr.Mohd. Quasim Ali was a retired Civil Surgeon, he expired on 28.03.1989. His father was the owner and possessor of properties bearing MCH Nos.13-3-994/1, situated at Malakpet Hyderabad, described as schedule ‘A’ properties and properties bearing MCH No.3-2-739 to 3-2-744, situated at Chappal Bazar, Hyderabad, described as ‘B’ schedule properties in the plaint, leaving behind him, his wife Smt. Tayyaba Begum, the plaintiff and the defendants. Their mother Smt. Tayyaba Begum also passed away on 25.02.1994. During his lifetime, the father of the plaintiff permitted the 2^nd defendant to collect the rents from the tenants in respect of ‘B’ schedule properties situated at Chappal Bazar and to hand over the said rents to him. Even after the demise of Dr. Mohd.Quasim Ali, the 2^nd defendant was collecting the rents from the tenants in respect of ‘B’ schedule properties. His father deposited enormous amounts in various banks in his name. There were also jewellery, gold and silver ornaments of the mother of the plaintiff. The movable and immovable properties were the Matruka property of late Dr. Mohd. Quasim Ali and the same were in joint possession of all the co-owners or sharers. The plaintiff number of times requested the defendants to effect partition of the above properties and for his legal share in the said properties, but they postponed the matter on one pretext or the other and dragged for a long time, for which the plaintiff filed O.S. No.747 of 1994 which was allotted to IV Senior Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Later, the said suit was transferred to the I-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and from there to VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. In between the said period, the plaintiff had undergone chest pain on 19.06.2000 and on 31.07.2000 and was admitted in Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad. The plaintiff later received a notice dated 23.10.2000 from the VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to appear in the said court. The plaintiff appeared in the said Court on 08.11.2000 and the matter was posted to 14.11.2000 and subsequently to 27.112000. The plaintiff could not stand or bear to stand in the said health condition. He filed a memo of withdrawal in the said suit and the said suit was withdrawn. Once again, on 21.08.2002, the plaintiff had undergone chest pain due to harassment caused by defendants No.1 to 9 in failing to partition the properties. Having no other source left, the plaintiff filed the suit for partition for his legal share by giving a notice in Newspaper on 31.10.2002. The plaintiff further submitted that they belonged to Hanafi sect and the shares should be divided as per Muslim Law. He along with defendants No.2, 4, 5, 6 and 8 were entitled to get 1/8^th share in the suit schedule properties and defendants No.1, 3, 7 and 9 were entitled to get 1/16^th share in the suit schedule properties.

4. The 1^st defendant filed written statement admitting the relationship and that the properties were undivided. She stated tha