Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Wilson in his Mahomedan Law at p. 337 states :-
If a gift of tangible property is made subject to a condition inconsistent with full ownership on the part of the donee of the thing given, the gift is valid, but the condition void.
Exception.-If the condition is that the thing given shall belong absolutely to the donee in the event of his surviving the donor, but shall return to the donor on his surviving the donee, the better opinion seems to bo that the gift is void altogether.
In Ameer Ali on Mahomedan. Law, Vol. I, page 134, it is stated:-

60. The essential differences between gift and will under Mahomedan law are : (1) in gift, there is immediate physical transfer of possession ; it is not so in will. (2) Tender, acceptance and seisin are necessary to validate a gift; it is not so in will. (3) Gift in future is void, such a disposition by will is not necessarily void. (4) Gift of limited interests, ariat for instance, is resumable at any time ; limited bequests, usufructuary wills for instance, are not resumable. Therefore it amounts practically to a life interest. The law of gifts and of wills differs in many respects. Hence passages from the Hedaya from pp. 308 and 309, quoted by Mirza J. do not apply in this case. See also Baillie, 2nd Ed., p. 664 ; Ameer Ali's Mahommedan Law, Vol. I, p. 647.

87. In the case of gift any condition derogatory of the completeness of the gift is void and the gift takes effect absolutely. It is for this reason that umra (ordinarily spelt as amree), which is a kind of gift, has the effect of an absolute gift and the condition that the property should revert to the donor after the death of the donee is void. There is no word like 'hayatee' in Arabic.

88. When in a will there is a bequest of the usufruct in favour of one person and of the corpus in favour of another, the donee of the corpus, if alive at the death of the testator, becomes the owner of the corpus, and the usufructuary donee becomes the owner of the usufruct. Thus, Ajam became on the death of Aishabai the owner of the corpus.

Ameer Ali says at p, 140:-
Under the Hanafi Law, a life-grant or 'Umra,' if made in terms which imply an absolute gift, takes effect as a hiba, the condition limiting the gift being held void. A gift to A for life and remainder to B takes effect as an absolute gift to A,-to use an English expression, gives him an estate in fee.
The footnote to the above passage is important:-
Ahmed bin Hanbal and others, says the Durr-ul-Mukhtar, have held a rukba to be invalid and an 'umra' to be valid on the authority of a tradition of the Prophet who declared that when a grant is made for another's life he takes it for his life.