Y.K.SABHARWAL, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
K. Balakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
K. Kamalam – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
When a parent makes a gift to a child, there is a presumption that the child accepts the gift, even if there is no explicit act of acceptance by the minor (!) (!) .
A gift of property can be validly made by a parent to a minor child, with ownership transferred to the child, while the parent reserves the right to manage or enjoy the property during their lifetime. There is no legal prohibition against transferring ownership without immediate possession or enjoyment by the donor (!) (!) .
The law recognizes that a minor can accept a gift, especially when the donor is the natural guardian and the gift is non-onerous (not burdened with obligations). Such acceptance can be implied through conduct or silence, and does not require explicit acceptance (!) (!) .
The acceptance of a gift by a minor does not necessarily require formal act; it can be presumed from circumstances such as the minor's knowledge of the gift, the conduct of the donor and guardians, and the minor's failure to repudiate the gift upon reaching majority (!) (!) .
A gift made by a parent to a minor, once accepted, becomes irrevocable if the gift is complete and the minor has not repudiated it after attaining majority. The law prohibits revoking such a gift unless specific conditions for revocation are met (!) (!) .
The legal framework permits a donor to reserve certain rights, such as management or usufruct, while transferring ownership, provided there is no legal prohibition. Such reservations do not invalidate the transfer of ownership (!) (!) .
The law supports the presumption that a gift to a minor is accepted, especially when the minor is of sufficient age to understand the nature of the gift, and the donor and guardians are aware of the transaction (!) (!) .
The validity of a gift to a minor is reinforced when the donor and guardians act in a manner consistent with acceptance, even if there is no explicit acknowledgment from the minor (!) (!) .
Once a gift is made and accepted, it cannot be revoked by the donor unless specific legal conditions for revocation are satisfied, such as a contractual agreement or particular circumstances outlined in the law (!) (!) .
Overall, the legal principles uphold that a gift from a parent to a minor, if completed and accepted, is effective and binding, and such acceptance can be inferred from conduct and circumstances rather than explicit acts.
JUDGMENT
Dharmadhikari, J.-The only substantial question of law involved in this appeal is whether the appellant, who was minor on the date of execution of the gift-deed dated 24.9.1945, can be held to have legally accepted the property in suit gifted to him and the said gift-deed was irrevocable.
2. The appellant shall hereinafter be described as the donee and his deceased mother as the doner . The relevant dates and facts leading to this appeal preferred against the impugned judgment dated 6.8.1999 of the High Court of Kerala, passed in Second Appeal No. 671 of 1992 are thus:-
3. On 24.9.1945, mother Devyani-donor executed a registered gift-deed of 1/8th share of the property inherited by her from her maternal grandfather in favour of her minor son aged 16 years being the present appellant (donee) and her daughter Kamalam (respondent No. 1 herein) who was aged four years. The 1/8th share of the property gifted is described in the schedule of gift-deed i.e. one acre and 25 cents of property in Survey No. 7481 & 7482 with school building in Mayyanad Cherry in the State of Kerala. Under the terms of the gift-deed ownership of the property, half and half, to each of the two donees w
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.