TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether a transfer of immovable property to a daughter at the time of marriage as pasupu kumkuma is a gift requiring registration. (ii) Whether lands so transferred and possessed by the daughters are to be excluded from the donor's holding under the land reforms ceiling .
Issue (i): Whether a transfer of immovable property to a daughter at the time of marriage as pasupu kumkuma is a gift requiring registration.
Analysis: The transfer was examined in the light of the Hindu law duty to maintain an unmarried daughter, which includes reasonable expenses incidental to marriage. A marriage provision made in discharge of that obligation was treated as a transfer for consideration and not as a gift within the meaning of Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act. Since it was not a gift, the requirements of registration under Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act did not apply. Even where an instrument existed, it could evidence the transaction and the transfer could also be established by oral evidence and by proof of delivery of possession.
Conclusion: The transfer did not amount to a gift and did not require registration.
Issue (ii): Whether lands so transferred and possessed by the daughters are to be excluded from the donor's holding under the land reforms ceiling law.
Analysis: Once the transfer was held to be valid, the daughters' possession pursuant to the transaction became material for determining the holding under the ceiling law. The expression "holding" was understood to refer to land in actual possession, including land held through lawful possession and part performance. On that basis, the lands given to the daughters could not be treated as continuing in the donor's holding.
Conclusion: The lands were not includible in the donor's holding.
Final Conclusion: The revision petitions succeeded because the marriage-related transfers to the daughters were valid without registration and the lands so transferred were excluded from the petitioner's ceiling holding.
Ratio Decidendi: A marriage-related transfer of immovable property to a daughter in discharge of the father's maintenance obligation is not a gift under Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act and, when possession is delivered, the property is not includible in the donor's holding for ceiling purposes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
