The Supreme Court while considering a civil appeal observed that a gift deed must be effectuated within the lifetime of the donor and further remarked regarding the acceptance that “acceptance can be inferred by the implied conduct of the donee.”
Facts
The proceedings were initiated against the appellant by the revenue ceiling department under the ceiling act. The revenue ceiling department went to the court of deputy sub-divisional officer which rejected their plea since the appellant had already gifted a part of his land to his son and was not holding any land above the ceiling limit. The department further filed a writ petition in high court where the single judge bench also held that the gift deed was valid in the eyes of law and there was no surplus land due to which the case was beyond the purview of section 6 of The Rajasthan Imposition of Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1973. The department further appealed before the divisional bench of the high court which held that the gift deed was invalid and the order of the single judge was in ignorance of section 30 D and 30DD of the tenancy act of 1955. Aggrieved by the order the appellant came with a civil appeal before the honourable Apex court.
Appellant’s Plea
The appellant’s counsel submitted that the gift deed was between the father and son thus there was an implied acceptance according to which the deed was executed way back in 1963. The counsel further added that the deed was valid in the eyes of law since it was executed within the life time of the father and the son was of the age of majority during the execution of the deed. The counsel also submitted that the transfer did not violate provisions of the tenancy act of 1955.
Respondent’s Contentions
The counsel for respondent argued that the high court’s divisional bench’s decision was correct since it correctly assessed the details and also relied on the relevant provisions of tenancy act of 1955 while passing the judgement and pleaded that the present appeal be dismissed.
The Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court bench of Justice NV Ramana Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Surya Kant observed that the gift deed was willingly executed by the father and regarding the acceptance of the son the court remarked “he aforesaid fact can be ascertained from the surrounding circumstances such as taking into possession the property by the donee or by being in the possession of the gift deed itself. The only requirement stipulated here is that, the acceptance of the gift must be effectuated within the lifetime of the donor itself. Hence, being an act of receiving willingly, acceptance can be inferred by the implied conduct of the donee.” And the court further added to this regard “the abovementioned circumstances clearly indicate that there was an acceptance of the gift by the done during the lifetime of the donor. Not only the gift deed in itself contained recitals about transfer of possession, but also the mutation records and the statements of the both the donor and done indicate that, there has been an acceptance of the gift by conduct.”
The court also took up the issue regarding the provisions of the tenancy act of 955. The court found that the son to whom the land was transferred used it for agricultural purposes and cultivated the land which was an exception to those provisions of the tenancy act, 1955 which barred such transfer of land. After evaluation of the case the court set aside the high court’s judgement and held that the appellant was exempted from any implications under section 6 of the ceiling act of 1973.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
