compensation of an amount of `50,000/- towards the loss of
unborn child and a further sum of `10,000/- towards pain and
sufferings ... appeal involved a very important question of law,
namely, whether an unborn child (foetus) while still in mother's womb
can be considered
correct to say that under it the usufruct was transferred to
unborn discendants. Under the Mohamedan law a wakf is a
gift to charity ... property is transferred to God Almighty, yet Its usufruct is
transferred to unborn descendants of the waqi generation
after generation." I am unable
gift deed to show an intention of the donor to
exclude the unborn male children from the title of property survey No.306 which ... which read as under :
"13. Transfer for benefit of unborn personWhere,
on a transfer of property, an interest therein is created
time of transfer. Even if transfer is in
favour of unborn person, at the date of transfer to be valid
there ... deed of settlement cannot be construed as
a transfer in favour of unborn person, yet it settles
property on trust and the unborn children, under
deed in favour of defendant No.1 and for the benefit of
unborn person was void under Section 13 of the Transfer
of Property ... Transfer of Property Act provides:
16
“ Section 13 . Transfer for benefit of unborn
person.—Where, on a transfer of property,
an interest therein is created
claim for compensation
but might become symptomatic in future and the yet unborn
children of mothers exposed to MIC toxicity, who may develop
congenital defects ... existence at the time of exposure; and
those who were not yet unborn and whose congenital defects
are traceable to MIC toxicity inherited or derived
that vesting in any event cannot take place
in favour of an unborn person and vesting must be viz-a-viz a
living person ... legal fiction pertaining to vesting to an
unborn person would not arise. We do find some contentious
substance in the contextual facts, since vesting shall
have been the intention of
the legislature to impose a liability on unborn persons.
[760 B]
C.B.C. Deshmukh v. I. Mallapa Chanbassappa ... claims of the
State or outsiders were concerned, he thought that an unborn
son would not come into the picture. 'therefore, he
recognised
appellant
that bequests of the property by the testator to the
unborn son of Hamir subject to his life interest was
void under the provisions ... appears to us that the bequests in favour of
the unborn son of Hamir by the testator of the
immovable properties was absolute
Hindu Law--Will--Bequest to unborn person.
HEADNOTE:
K, a Hindu had no issue, but had a brother R who had 3
daughters ... cannot make a gift or
'bequest for the benefit of an unborn person yet that
doctrine has been engraved in Hindu
