Key Points: - The gift, once validly executed and accepted, cannot be unilaterally cancelled; unilateral cancellation is void. (!) (!) (!) - Section 126 TP Act permits revocation or suspension only under specific conditions; otherwise gifts are generally irrevocable. (!) (!) (!) (!) - The Trial Court’s failure to order an inquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 for mesne profits was an error; cross objections allowed to grant mesne profits after decree. (!) (!) (!) - The respondent-plaintiff was declared owner of the ground floor and the appellant-directed possession; cancellation deeds Ex.A5 and Ex.A6 were found void for lack of proper bilateral action. (!) (!) (!) - Existence and effect of Gift Settlement Deed (Ex.A4) and its non-revocable nature under law; revocation required proper consent or bilateral agreement, not unilateral action. (!) (!) (!) - The donor’s age and capacity and the status of the mother (Radha Bai) were discussed in assessing validity and non-joinder issues. (!) (!) - The High Court dismissed the main appeal but allowed cross objections regarding mesne profits, directing an inquiry under Order 20 Rule 12. (!) - The appellate court cited several Supreme Court and High Court decisions clarifying the irrevocability of gifts and proper procedure for cancellation. (!) (!) (!) (!)

What is the effect of unilateral cancellation of a Gift Settlement Deed under Section 126 Transfer of Property Act as discussed in the judgment?

What is the court’s view on awarding mesne profits and under what circumstances is an inquiry under Order 20 Rule 12 to be conducted?

What are the rights and remedies of a donee vs donor when a Gift Deed is challenged or cancelled, and what binding effect do exs like Ex.A4, Ex.A5, Ex.A6 have on the parties?