Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

B. The trial court's Judgement On 21-3-2018, the suit was decreed by the trial court declaring that the gift deeds mentioned above are null and void-ab-initio on the ground that the property in question is ancestral property and the father has not taken the consent of other coparceners and further had not executed the gift deeds for legal necessity.

The learned trial court further declared the above-mentioned relinquishment deed void on the ground that the property is ancestral property and there is no consideration given for relinquishment of the share in the ancestral property. The court has further held that since the deeds are void so the question of getting it set aside by the court is not required.

2026:JHHC:12991 Learned trial court, after perusal of gift deeds and settled legal position in this regard, has concluded that gift deeds are void ab-initio and not valid in law.

Learned 1st Appellate Court after perusal of evidence on record has affirmed the findings and held that gift deeds are void-ab-initio and on the basis of same, plaintiff and her sisters cannot be deprived of their share in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Court in the case of Veenita Sharma Vrs. Rakesh Sharma & Ors (Supra).

xvii. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered view that the learned courts have rightly held that the gift deeds were void-ab-initio.

33. Thus, this court holds that both the courts have rightly disbelieved the registered Relinquishment Deed (exhibit-4D) executed by the three sisters in favour of the four brothers (appellants- defendant no. 1 to 4) and also rightly disbelieved the registered gift deeds (Ext.3A to 3D) executed by father of the parties in favour of the four brothers (appellants- defendant no. 1 to 4) and have rightly held that the relinquishment deed as well as the gift deeds were void -ab-initio. The substantial questions of law nos. 2 and 3 are accordingly decided against the appellants and in favour of the contesting respondents.

44. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the gift deeds as well as the relinquishment deed were void-ab-initio / null and void and did not pass any right, title and interest to the defendant nos. 1 to 4 and accordingly the challenge to the gift deeds as well as the relinquishment deed as void ab initio was only consequential to the main relief of partition and the suit cannot be said to be barred by limitation when seen in the light of the judgement passed in the case of Prem Singh (supra) and the judgment passed in the case of Shanti Devi (supra) and the judgement passed in the case of Sukhbiri Devi (supra) does not help the appellants (defendant no. 1 to 4 ) in any manner.