Transfer of bank fixed deposits and protection of pardanashin women require written proof, free consent, and independent advice.

A bank fixed deposit is treated as an actionable claim, so any transfer of the depositor's share requires a written instrument signed by the transferor under Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882; mere delivery of the fixed deposit receipts is not enough. The article also states that the presumption favours an approved marriage form, and oral evidence of an unapproved or asura marriage must be reliable and supported by circumstances before inheritance claims can rest on it. It further notes that a pardanashin woman is not bound by an agreement unless free agency and independent advice are shown, especially where the document is executed under another's influence.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the alleged gift of the share in fixed deposits was proved and valid in law; (ii) whether the deceased was married in an unapproved form so that the plaintiff could inherit her stridhan; and (iii) whether the agreement dated 1 March 1937 bound the plaintiff.

Issue (i): whether the alleged gift of the share in fixed deposits was proved and valid in law.

Analysis: The evidence did not establish that the deceased intended to make a gift of her share in the bank deposits. Even on the assumption that she intended to benefit the plaintiff, the subject-matter was not merely movable property but an actionable claim, because a fixed deposit represents a debt due from the bank. A transfer of such a claim falls under Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and requires an instrument in writing signed by the transferor. Mere delivery of the fixed deposit receipts was insufficient for completion of the transfer.

Conclusion: The alleged gift was not proved and was not validly perfected in law.

Issue (ii): whether the deceased was married in an unapproved form so that the plaintiff could inherit her stridhan.

Analysis: The presumption favoured an approved form of marriage, and the oral evidence relied upon to prove an asura marriage was found unreliable. The surrounding circumstances did not justify a definite inference that the marriage was contracted for consideration. In any event, even if the marriage had been unapproved, the deceased's father's widow would take in preference to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff would not succeed as heir on the facts proved.

Conclusion: The deceased's marriage in an unapproved form was not proved, and the plaintiff had no title by inheritance.

Issue (iii): whether the agreement dated 1 March 1937 bound the plaintiff.

Analysis: The plaintiff, being an aged pardanashin woman living under the influence and protection of the defendant, was entitled to independent advice and real freedom of action before being bound by such a document. On the evidence, that standard was not satisfied, and the agreement could not be treated as her free and voluntary act.

Conclusion: The agreement did not bind the plaintiff.

Final Conclusion: Although the plaintiff was not bound by the agreement, her suit failed because neither a valid gift nor a right by inheritance was established.

Ratio Decidendi: A bank fixed deposit is an actionable claim whose transfer requires a written instrument under Section 130 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and a pardanashin woman is not bound by an executed document unless free agency and independent advice are shown.

---