DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,

LUCKNOW

ACADEMIC SESSION 2021-22

FINAL DRAFT
FAMILY LAW- II

TOPIC: ASSESSING THE LAW RELATING TO GIFTS

SUBMITTED BY: UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:

SHIVA PAL MRS. SAMREEN HUSSAIN
ROLL NO: 200101127 ASSISTANT PROFFESOR
SECTION ‘B’
SEMESTER IV
B.A. LLB (Hons.)

Family Law
Page 1
 CONTENTS

 ACKNOWLEDGMENT.....................................................................................................3
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES...............................................................................................4
 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................5
 HINDU AND MOHMMADAN LAW ON GIFTS.............................................................6
 CRITIQUE OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO GIFTS..................................9
 CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................14
 BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................................................................15

Family Law
Page 2
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

“Words can never convey what deeds have done.”

Writing a project on any topic is never a single man’s job. I am overwhelmed in all humbleness
and gratefulness to acknowledge my depth to all those who have helped me to put these ideas,
well above the level of simplicity and into something concrete.

I am very thankful to my Mrs. Samreen Hussain for her valuable help and guidance. She was
always there to show me the right track when I needed her help. With the help of her valuable
suggestions, guidance and encouragement, I was able to complete this project.

I would also like to thank my friends, who often helped and gave me support at critical junctures
during the making to this project.

I hope you will appreciate the hard work that I have put in this research project.

Family Law
Page 3
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Statutes
1. Indian Contract Act, 1872
2. Registration Act, 1908
3. The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Application) Act of 1937
4. Transfer of Property Act, 1882

Cases
1. Amir Khan v Ghouse Khan (1985)2 MLJ P.136.
2. Anandi Devi v Mohan Lal (1932) 54 All 534
3. Gopalchandra Shastri, A Treatise on Hindu Law (8thedn Ashok Law House 2012)
4. Hafeeza Bibi and Ors v Shaikh Faird 2011(5) SCC 654.
5. HM Doshi v A Kareem, ALR 1975 Pat 150.
6. Krishna Kumar Mahoto v SukhlalRewani 2005 AIHC 3192.
7. Kulasekaraperumal v P ThalevanarAIR 1961 Mad 405.
8. Mohammad Abdul Ghani Khan v. Fakhr Jahan Begam (1922) 24 BOMLR 1268.
9. Mohan Ali v State of MP (1975) 2 SCWR 5111
10. Munni Devi v Chhoti AIR 1983 All 444.
11. Nasib Ali v Wajid Ali AIR 1927 Cal 197.
12. S Sarojini Amma v Velayudhan Pillai Sreekumar 2018 SCC OnLine SC 2200.
13. Sainath Mandir Trust v Vijaya V Mandale 2004 (1) Bom LR 259.
14. Sonia Bhatia v State of UP AIR 1981 SC (1279).
15. Uddandu Sahib v Masthan Bi AIR 1975 AP 271.

Family Law
Page 4
 INTRODUCTION

Gifting is simply giving something without getting anything in return. While a gift can be
something as trivial as giving a pen to someone, it can also be something as significant as giving
a land costing a life’s worth of money. In India there are two major laws which govern the
practice of gifting: The Transfer of Property Act and the Mohammaddan Law. While there are
similarities and parallels between the two laws, examining which is interesting in its own right, it
is when these laws differ that their analysis becomes much more fascinating and consequential.

The intent of this paper is to explore the two laws related to gifts, understand their intricacies,
how and why they diverge, with a special focus on critiquing certain aspects of the existing law
and suggesting viable changes in the context of current needs. The scope of the paper is limited
largely to the aspects of registration and possession in the context of gifts of immovable
properties, but other aspects such as revocation and conditional and contingent gifts are
discussed briefly as well.

To this end, the paper is divided into two parts. The first part examines broadly the law on gifts
in India. It briefly deals with the chief concepts related to gifts under the Transfer of Property
Act and then under Muslim Law. This is followed by a comparison of the two laws, especially
the differences between the two related to need for registration and conditional and contingent
gifts.

The second part of the paper relates to a critique of certain provisions of the law on gifts. The
three arguments made in this section are first, that registration of gift should be a necessary
condition for a valid gift under Mohammaddan Law, second, in any case Muslims should be
allowed to gift properties under the Transfer of Property Act rather than their personal law and
third, the law adding income generated from assets gifted to wife and daughter in law to total
taxable income must be removed.

Family Law
Page 5
 HINDU AND MOHMMADAN LAW ON GIFTS

The current law on gifts is largely formed by provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
and case laws.1 While applicable to Hindus, the Act provides an exception for Muslims, such that
in case of any conflict between provisions of the Act and Mohmmaddan law, the latter shall
prevail.2

Gift is defined under S 122 of the Act as “Gift is the transfer of certain existing movable and
immovable property made voluntarily and without consideration…accepted by or on behalf of
the donee”.3From this definition, three essential elements of a valid gift are clear: first, the
transfer must be voluntary, second, it must be without consideration and third, it needs to be
accepted by the donee.4Voluntary transfer here means by the exercise of unfettered free will by
the donor, knowing what they were doing and without any pressure or undue influence. 5 Without
consideration implies that the transaction is gratuitous or out of love and affection and not in
return or exchange of anything.6Acceptance has to be given before the death of the donor and
while he is still capable of giving. 7 The acceptance may be express or implied 8 and transfer of
possession is not necessary for the validity of the gift. 9 Additionally, for a valid gift, the donor
needs to be competent to contract, i.e., a major and of sound mind. 10The donee however may be a
lunatic or a minor, and their guardian can accept on their behalf. 11 Gift may also be given to an
idol.12

Although the property may be either movable or immovable, it needs to be existing property and
future property cannot be gifted.13A Hindu under both Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools can

1
Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usage (17thedn Bharat Law House 2014) 1529.
2
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 129; Hari Singh Gour’s Commentary on the Transfer of Property Act (12thedn Vol
2 Delhi Law House 2010) 2378.
3
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 122.
4
Darashaw J Vakil’s Commentaries on the Transfer of Property Act (3rdedn LexisNexis 2009) 1825.
5
Manohar and Chitaley, Commentary on the Transfer of Property Act (7thedn Vol 3 AIR Nagpur 2010) 748.
6
Darashaw (n 4) 1826.
7
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 122.
8
Mayne (n 1) 1532; Anandi Devi v Mohan Lal(1932) 54 All 534; Krishna Kumar Mahoto v SukhlalRewani2005
AIHC 3192.
9
ibid 1532; Darashaw (n 4) 1833.
10
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 7; Indian Contract Act 1872, s 11.
11
Darashw (n 4) 1837.
12
Darashaw (n 4) 1838.
13
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 124.
Family Law
Page 6
gift away their separate or self-acquired property. 14 Although a few exceptions exist, an interest
in a co-parcenary property under the Mitakshara school cannot be gifted unless partition is
done.15 Similarly, a woman can gift away her Stridhana.16

An important aspect of law of gifts under the Transfer of Property Act is the requirement of a
registered instrument, a ‘gift deed’, signed by or on behalf of the donor, and attested by at least
two witnesses.17The gift can only be made if the pre-existing right of the donor is divested in the
donee by the operation of S 17 of the Registration Act. 18 Therefore, any gift that is not registered
is invalid, thereby giving no right over the property to the donee.19

The Mohammaddan law applies in incidents of gifts between two Mohammaddans. 20 It has a
different conception of gifts. Even though both inter vivos and testamentary disposition are
permitted, the former is not restricted in terms of quantum. 21 The terms gift and hiba are often
used interchangeably, however, gift is a much wider term than hiba.22Hiba is to make a person
the owner of the substance of a thing (tamlik al-ain) without consideration.23This is different
from ariya which is the transfer of only the usufruct (tamlik al-manafe) of a property.24Therefore,
in Muslim law there is a distinction between gifting corpus and other rights of a property.25

There are three essential requirements for a valid gift under Mohammaddan law: donor’s
declaration of the gift (ijab), donee’s acceptance of it (qabul), and delivery of possession
(qabza).26But there is no need for a written deed to constitute a valid gift. 27 The requirement of a
written and attested deed under S 123 of the Transfer of Property Act is not applicable to

14
Mayne (n 1) 1532.
15
ibid; Gopalchandra Shastri, A Treatise on Hindu Law (8thedn Ashok Law House 2012) 61.
16
Shastri ibid.
17
Transfer of Property Act 1882, s 123;Darashaw (n 4) 1857; Sainath Mandir Trust v Vijaya V Mandale 2004 (1)
Bom LR 259.
18
Darashaw (n 4) 1858.
19
Biru v Nanhi 2007 (4) Punj LR 326.
20
Darashaw (n 4) 1849.
21
Asaf AA Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law (5thedn Tahir Mahmood ed 2008) 181.
22
ibid.
23
ibid.
24
ibid;Syed Ameer Ali, Mahommedan Law (6thedn Vol. 1 Tahir Mahmood ed 1985) 35.
25
Fyzee (n 19) 181.
26
Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law (19thedn M Hidayatullah ed Butterworth 2001) S 149; Ali (n 22) 41; Fyzee
(n 19) 181; Darashaw (n 4) 1849.
27
Mulla (n 25) S 147
Family Law
Page 7
Muslims because of the exception provided in S 129. 28 Therefore, a gift under Mohammaddan
law is to be affected in the manner provided by Mahommaddan law and it will be valid
regardless of it being effected by a written instrument or where such an instrument exists but is
not attested. Conversely, if all formalities are not fulfilled, then even if there is a written and
attested instrument prescribed under S 123, the gift will not be valid. 29For instance, if A executes
a deed of gift of a land in favor of B and the deed is registered, but the possession is not given to
B, the gift would be incomplete and void.

This is perhaps the biggest difference between Mohammaddan law and the law under the
Transfer of Property Act: in the former, a gift is not valid unless transfer of possession takes
place, regardless of registration of written deed; and in the latter even if the transfer of
possession is not done, as long as the deed is registered and other conditions are fulfilled, the gift
would be valid.

Another area where the two laws diverge is the concept of conditional and contingent gifts. As
stated above, one of the defining characteristics of a gift under the Transfer of Property Act is the
lack of consideration. It is this complete lack of a consideration from one side which makes a
transfer a gift; in fact a gift which is aptly described as a gratuity and an act of generosity, could
not be termed a gift if there was a consideration involved. 30 It should follow from this that if a
gift is made to a person on the condition that they would pay the debts of the donor, the
transaction is not a gift. This is what the court observed in Kulasekaraperumal v P. Thalevanar31.
Similarly, in Munni Devi v Chhoti32when the mother executed a gift deed in favor of her daughter
on the condition that the daughter would look after the mother throughout her life, the gift deed
was held to be not enforceable because of the condition imposed. Therefore, any conditional gifts
should be invalid under the Transfer of Property Act.

However, conditional gifts are held to be valid under Hindu law. 33 S 126 of the Transfer of
Property Act provides that a gift may be revoked on the happening of a specified event which is

28
Nasib Ali v Wajid AliAIR 1927 Cal 197.
29
Mulla (n 25) S 150 (2); Fyzee (n 19) 181.
30
Sonia Bhatia v State of UPAIR 1981 SC (1279).
31
AIR 1961 Mad 405.
32
AIR 1983 All 444.
33
Darashaw (n 4) 1849.
Family Law
Page 8
beyond the will of the donor. In fact, as recently held by the Supreme Court in Sarojini Amma v
Velayudhan Pillai Sreekumar34, conditional gifts are incomplete until the attached conditions are
fulfilled, and the gift can be revoked at any time before the fulfilment of this condition.35

Mohammaddan law rejects the imposition of any condition on a gift. It recognizes only absolute
and unrestricted dominion over corpus of a property, therefore if a gift seeks to impose a
condition that is inconsistent with such absolute dominion, the condition would be
rejected.36Thus, under Muslim law, conditions cannot be imposed on gifts. In Hiba the
immediate and absolute ownership over a property is to be transferred to the donee, thereby
making any annexed condition or restriction invalid while the gift remains valid. 37Faizee quotes
the Fatawa Aamgiri which says:“All our ‘masters’ are agreed that when one has made a gift and
stipulated for a condition that is fasid or invalid, the gift is valid and the condition
void.”38Similarly, contingent gifts are also held to be void under Muslim law.

CRITIQUE OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS RELATING TO GIFTS

While by and large, the laws related to gifts are clear, simple and non-problematic, there are
some provisions which need modification. One area in particular that saw conflicting judicial
interpretations and caused controversy was related to the need for registration of gift deeds under
Muslim law.39 Certainly, there is no such requirement under the Transfer of Property Act because
of the exemption under S 129. However, S 17 of the Registration Act, 1908 requires registration
of “instruments of gift of immovable property;”. There is no exception for Muslim law either. In
Uddandu Sahib v. Masthan Bi,40 it was held that “if all the formalities as prescribed by Muslim
Law regarding the making of gifts are satisfied, the gift is valid notwithstanding the fact it is oral
and without any instrument”. But it was also observed that in case of a contemporaneous
document, registration was required. This reasoning found further support as the Madras High
34
2018 SCC OnLine SC 2200.
35
See also Renikuntla Rajamma (D) By Lr v K. Sarwanamma(2014) 9 SCC 445.
36
Mohan Ali v State of MP (1975) 2 SCWR 5111; Mulla (n 25) S 166.
37
Fyzee (n 19) 183.
38
Bailee 546 as cited in Fyzee (n 19) 183.
39
Jean-Philippe Dequen, ‘Muslim immovable gifts: to register or not to register… that was the question. Recent
developments following ‘Hafeeza Bibi v. Shaikh Farid’’, (Women's Rights in Muslim Contexts 13 September
2012)< https://womenproperty.hypotheses.org/346> accessed January 3 2019.
40
AIR 1975 AP 271.
Family Law
Page 9
Court held “Though a Muslim could create a valid gift orally, if he should reduce the same in
writing, the gift is not be valid unless it is duly registered”.41However, the law was settled when
the Supreme Court held in Hafeeza Bibi and Ors v Shaikh Faird42“A Muslim gift may be valid
even without a registered deed and may be invalid even with a registered deed. Registration
being irrelevant to its legal force, a deed setting out Muslim gift cannot be regarded as
constitutive of the gift and is not compulsorily registerable”.

While the judgement did clarify what the law is and put to rest a lot of uncertainty, such a
formulation is not necessarily for the best. According to Fyzee, in certain situations under
Muslim law, the document may “itself be the instrument of gift, such a writing in certain
circumstances require registration... if there is a declaration, acceptance and delivery of
possession coupled with the formal instrument of gift it must be registered”.43When the
Mohammaddan Law texts were promulgated, there were no Transfer of Property or Registration
Acts, and in the absence of contemplation of what the current requirements are, it is hard to
believe that the law was intended to be laid down for all times. 44 Even Mulla accepted that
registration is needed based on the particular facts of each case.45 Further, Muslim tradition has
always supported the act of recording. Verse 282 of Chapter 2 of the Koran states: “And do not
disdain to write down your transactions, small or great; this finds favor in the sight of God and
provides evidence, better to avoid doubts and disputes among you”.

It needs to be realized that registration after all is only a procedural requirement to protect the
owner of a property.46 It protects the owner from unnecessary litigation and deceptive transfers.
If the donee wants to sell the property to a third party, lack of registration may lead to an endless
litigation.47 The Supreme Court while noting the importance of registration, observed,

“Unscrupulous property owners enter into agreements of sale and

take huge earnest money deposits/ advances and sell the property

41
Amir Khan v Ghouse Khan (1985)2 MLJ P.136.
42
2011(5) SCC 654.
43
Fyzee (n 19) 182.
44
Mohammad Abdul Ghani Khan v. Fakhr Jahan Begam(1922) 24 BOMLR 1268.
45
Mulla (n 25) 120.
46
Mukund Sarda, ‘Gifts Under Muslim Law and the Requirement of Registration: A Study in the Light of Supreme
Court’s Decision in Hafeez Bibi and Others’ (2012) Vol. 8 Andhra Law Times 8, 10.
47
ibid.
Family Law
Page 10
 to others thereby plunging the original agreement holder and
subsequent purchaser into litigation... It(registration) will also
assist in putting an end to the prevalent practice of entering into
agreements of sale showing the real consideration and then
registering the sale deed for only a part of the real consideration…
It will also discourage the growth of land mafia and muscleman
who dominate the real estate scene in various parts of the
Country”

Therefore, innocent parties do suffer when there is no registration of sale or gift. As long as the
three requirements for valid transfer are not affected, addition of such a procedural requirement
under Muslim Law should not be an issue. Undoubtedly, protection of legitimate and innocent
owners of property is paramount and should therefore be prioritized. Hence, it is the researcher’s
submission that the following proviso be added to S 129 of the Transfer of Property Act:

“The provision of Indian Registration Act shall apply to all cases of gifts of immovable property
under Mohammaddan Law”.

Alternatively, we can approach the issue from a different perspective. One of the essential
requirements of a valid gift transfer under Muslim law is delivery of possession (Seisin). In fact,
for many years the practice under the common law of England was to transfer land by speaking
words either near or on the premises of the land in question. 48A charter was also endorsed with a
memorandum to mark the transfer of possession. 49Similarly, the transfer of possession for hiba
was needed in Muslim law for the following reasons: first, signify the final intention of the
original owner to transfer the property, until which he could go back on his promise; second,
because it was an act known to the general public, thus serving as proof of the gift; third, it
notified the creditors who had a claim over the land about secret transactions which could hurt
their claim; fourth, it protected families from sudden shocks after the demise of the head of the

48
William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England, (Vol 2) 310.
49
ibid.
Family Law
Page 11
house.50These considerations were common between Muslim Law and the law prevalent in
England at that time.51

However, from 1925 onwards the law in England changed and only grant by deed was retained. 52
The reasons for the switch were:

“The mere delivery of possession, either actual or symbolical,

depending on the ocular testimony and remembrance of the
witnesses, was liable to be forgotten or misrepresented, and
became frequently incapable of proof…Written deeds were
therefore introduced, in order to specify and perpetuate the
peculiar purposes of the party who conveyed; yet still, for a very
long series of years, they were never made use of, but in company
with the more ancient and notorious method of transfer, by
delivery of corporeal possession”53

As noted earlier, the biggest difference between hiba and gift under the Transfer of Property Act
is the requirement of registration. For the latter, transfer of possession is immaterial for the
validity of gift as long as it is registered. In fact, the execution of the deed itself amounts to
transfer. Therefore, prima facie there should no longer a need for transfer of possession to
complete the gift.

Admittedly, to say that the circumstances in India are the same as England would be going too
far. Still, in light of circumstances which certainly have changed enormously, there is a need for
retaining both the systems and allowing those who wish to gift an immovable property to choose
their preference.

A plain reading of S 129 shows that it does not impose an application of Muslim law on
particular transactions. The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Application) Act of 1937 provides
that “Notwithstanding any custom or usage to the contrary in all questions…
50
Danial Latifi, ‘Muslim Law’, (1975) The Indian Law Institute 43, 47 <
http://14.139.60.114:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/2938/1/146_1975_Muslim%20Law.pdf> accessed 2 January
2019.
51
ibid; Blackstone (n 48) 312.
52
Halsbury’s Laws of England, (Vol. 52 5thedn 2009 LexisNexis) 173.
53
Blackstone (n 48) 313-314.
Family Law
Page 12
regarding...gifts...the rule of decision in cases where the parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim
personal law (Shariat)”.54 This Act, does not affect any statute law provision. In fact, its
“mandate does not extend to situations where rights and obligations of Muslims are to be
governed by a statutory provision.”55The Muslim law on gifts has to conform to provisions of
order 21 rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Code in matters related to mode of assignment of a
decree.56 Therefore, on its own the Shariat Act does not affect gifts under S 123 of the Transfer
of Property Act which allows all persons, thus including Muslims, to gift immovable property.

In such a scenario we are left with no rule to decide the applicable law on a particular transaction
of gift, the Transfer of Property Act or Muslim Law. It is submitted that to make this
determination, the intention of the parties must be examined to determine which law they chose
to apply on their transfer of gift. Such a formulation would therefore allow Muslims to transfer
gifts by executing a gift deed.

Not only will this allow Muslims to make gifts under the statutory procedure instead of their
personal law if they wish; as a consequence, they will be able to make gifts without having to
transfer possession. This is of special importance to Muslims who under their personal law
cannot gift property with conditions and have to completely divest their interest to affect the
transfer.

Another law that needs to be looked at is a tax provision related to gifts. S 64 of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 that is related to clubbing of incomes provides that if a husband gifts any asset to his
wife or daughter-in-law, any income generated through such asset would be added to the taxable
income of the husband.57 The section was enacted in the 1960s in a time where women did not
have much or any independent taxable income. 58However, today when women have become
exponentially more financially independent, such a provision is obsolete. Not only is this law

54
TheMuslim Personal Law (Shariat Application) Act of 1937, S 2.
55
Latifi (n 50) 51.
56
HM Doshi v A Kareem, ALR 1975 Pat 150.
57
Homi Mistry, ‘Gift Tax in India: Rules and Exceptions Under Income Tax apply; here is how you can keep taxman
happy’ Financial Express<https://www.financialexpress.com/money/gift-tax-india-2017-diwali-gifting-season-is-
here-but-there-is-a-big-income-tax-returns-catch-for-receiver-here-is-how-to-keep-taxman-happy/889790/>
accessed 5 January 2019.
58
‘Don't Levy Income Tax on Gifts to Wives, Daughters-In-Law: Maneka Gandhi’ NDTV (India July 18 2018)<
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/dont-levy-income-tax-on-gifts-to-wives-daughters-in-law-maneka-gandhi-
1880812> accessed 5 January 2019.
Family Law
Page 13
patriarchal and arbitrary, it affects women adversely as the provision acts as a major disincentive
for people to gift property to wives and daughters-in-law, as they feel that it will become a heavy
burden on them later on.59

CONCLUSION

Giving gifts is an inherently personal act that has become an integral part of human interaction. It
is only logical that the law facilitating these transfers must be simple and effective, causing as
little inconvenience as possible. Even though broadly, there are not many problems with the two
laws that govern gifts in India, there is still need for effective and urgent reform.

There is a need to reconsider the tax provisions that add the income generated from assets gifted
to wife and daughter in law to total taxable income must be removed. It is also interesting to note
how conditional gifts are not really in the nature of gifts but acquire the character of sale as soon
as any condition is attached to the gift.

Reform is also required greatly in relation to Mohemmaddan law which although allows for
easier gifting of immovable properties as there is no need of registration, can still cause great
inconvenience to property holders. This is in light of the need for a system where all gifts are
registered as a matter of procedural requirement, and the ineffectiveness of necessitating transfer
of possession as an essential condition.

Further, it is wrong to deprive Muslims of availing the use of provisions relating to gifts in the
Transfer of Property Act. The researcher believes that it must be left to the choice of the persons
involved whether they want their transaction to be governed by Muslim law or by the Transfer of
Property Act.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books
59
ibid.
Family Law
Page 14
 1. Asaf AA Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law (5thedn Tahir Mahmood ed 2008)
2. Darashaw J Vakil’s Commentaries on the Transfer of Property Act (3rdedn LexisNexis
2009)
3. Gopalchandra Shastri, A Treatise on Hindu Law (8thedn Ashok Law House 2012)
4. Halsbury’s Laws of England, (Vol. 52 5thedn 2009 LexisNexis)
5. Hari Singh Gour’s Commentary on the Transfer of Property Act (12thedn Vol 2 Delhi
Law House 2010)
6. Manohar and Chitaley, Commentary on the Transfer of Property Act (7thedn Vol 3 AIR
Nagpur 2010)
7. Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usage (17thedn Bharat Law House 2014)
8. Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law (19thedn M Hidayatullah ed Butterworth 2001)
9. Syed Ameer Ali, Mahommedan Law (6thedn Vol. 1 Tahir Mahmood ed 1985)
10. William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England, (Vol 2).

Articles
1. Danial Latifi, ‘Muslim Law’, (1975) The Indian Law Institute
2. Don't Levy Income Tax on Gifts to Wives, Daughters-In-Law: Maneka Gandhi’ NDTV
(India July 18 2018)
3. Homi Mistry, ‘Gift Tax in India: Rules and Exceptions Under Income Tax apply; here is
how you can keep taxman happy’ Financial Express (India October 11 2017)
4. Jean-Philippe Dequen, ‘Muslim immovable gifts: to register or not to register… that was
the question. Recent developments following ‘Hafeeza Bibi v. Shaikh Farid’’, (Women's
Rights in Muslim Contexts 13 September 2012)
5. Mukund Sarda, ‘Gifts Under Muslim Law and the Requirement of Registration: A Study
in the Light of Supreme Court’s Decision in Hafeez Bibi and Others’ (2012) Vol. 8
Andhra Law Times

Family Law
Page 15