Summary
The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to sales made by a donee under a gift from his grandfather. Construing the deed as an absolute gift to the then-living grandson, the Court held its absolute restraint on alienation void under Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act. References to younger brothers or male descendants who might later be born did not make the gift invalid under Section 13.
Issues
- Whether the donee could alienate property despite the gift deed’s restraint.
- Whether references to persons who might later be born invalidated the gift under Section 13.
Provisions considered
- Section 10, Transfer of Property Act, 1882The absolute restraint on alienating the interest gifted to the donee was void. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19)
- Section 13, Transfer of Property Act, 1882The gift was to a living minor; the conditions referring to unborn relatives did not attract the asserted invalidity. (¶¶ 20, 21, 22, 23, 24)
Held
- The deed granted the property to the named grandson, then aged five, and conveyed ownership. Its prohibition of sale, gift, mortgage or other alienation was an absolute restraint and void under Section 10. The principle applies to gifts as well as other transfers. (¶¶ 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19)
- The Court distinguished a gift to an unborn person from conditions referring to relatives who might be born later. This deed gifted the property to a person already living, so the Section 13 objection failed on its construction. (¶¶ 20, 21, 23, 24)
- The High Court erred in holding that the donee lacked power to transfer the gifted property. The plaintiffs were not entitled to the declarations sought against the sales. (¶ 25)
Result
Plaintiffs’ appeal dismissed; claim for declarations invalidating the donee’s alienations rejected.