<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1962 (12) TMI 95 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289097</link>
    <description>Muslim personal law permits an oral gift of immovable property where the donor declares the gift, the donee accepts it, and possession is delivered. For a husband&#039;s gift to his wife, the husband&#039;s continued residence or receipt of rents does not alone invalidate the transfer. In Bihar, Muslim law governed such gifts through the applicable civil-court rule, the Shariat Act, and the preservation of Muslim gift rules under the Transfer of Property Act. Registration requirements for transfers under the Transfer of Property Act did not defeat a valid Muslim oral gift. Differential treatment of Muslim gifts was considered a reasonable classification and not contrary to Article 14.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2020 12:37:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=617404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (12) TMI 95 - PATNA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289097</link>
      <description>Muslim personal law permits an oral gift of immovable property where the donor declares the gift, the donee accepts it, and possession is delivered. For a husband&#039;s gift to his wife, the husband&#039;s continued residence or receipt of rents does not alone invalidate the transfer. In Bihar, Muslim law governed such gifts through the applicable civil-court rule, the Shariat Act, and the preservation of Muslim gift rules under the Transfer of Property Act. Registration requirements for transfers under the Transfer of Property Act did not defeat a valid Muslim oral gift. Differential treatment of Muslim gifts was considered a reasonable classification and not contrary to Article 14.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>