Supreme Court: Possession Not Required for Valid Gift Deed

I. Introduction

The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark decision dated 2025, clarified two critical legal principles concerning gift deeds:

1. Delivery of possession is not essential for the validity of a gift deed.
   
2. A gift deed cannot be unilaterally cancelled by the donor once executed.
   

The ruling overturns prior lower court decisions and reinforces well-established jurisprudence under Sections 122, 123, and 126 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

II. Case Background

The dispute revolved around a gift deed executed on June 26, 1985, by the father (Defendant No.1) in favor of his daughter (Respondent No.1). The deed was registered, but the father later executed a cancellation deed and a subsequent sale deed in favor of his son (Defendant No.2).

The Trial Court and First Appellate Court upheld the cancellation, treating the 1985 document as a Will, not a gift deed. However, the Kerala High Court reversed these findings, holding that the gift was valid, and the subsequent cancellation deed was ineffective. The son (appellant) challenged this ruling before the Supreme Court.

III. Legal Issues

1. Whether the 1985 document was a gift deed or a Will?
   
2. Whether delivery of possession is necessary for a valid gift deed?
   
3. Whether a donor can unilaterally revoke a registered gift deed?

IV. Arguments Presented

A. Appellant’s (Son’s) Arguments

• The 1985 document was a Will, not a gift deed, since ownership was not transferred immediately.
  
• The father retained possession and did not divest his ownership in praesenti, making it a testamentary document.
  
• As per Ramaswami Naidu v. Gopalakrishna Naidu (1978) and P.K. Mohan Ram v. B.N. Ananthachary (2010), a document must indicate an immediate transfer of title to qualify as a gift.
  
• The donee (daughter) never took possession, and therefore, the gift was incomplete.
  

B. Respondents’ (Daughter’s) Arguments

• The 1985 document was a registered gift deed, valid under Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.
  
• Possession is not a requirement for a valid gift deed, as held in Reninkuntala Rajamma v. K. Sarwanamma (2014).
  
• A registered gift deed cannot be unilaterally revoked under Section 126, as held in K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam (2004).
  
• The father had reserved only a life interest, which does not invalidate the gift.
  
• The mutation of revenue records in the son’s name after the sale does not confer ownership.
  

V. Supreme Court’s Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the Kerala High Court’s ruling, concluding that:

1. The 1985 Document Was a Gift Deed, Not a Will

• The gift deed clearly transferred ownership, reserving only a life interest for the father and mother.
  
• A Will is revocable at any time, but a gift deed creates an immediate, irrevocable transfer.
  
• Case law relied upon:
  • Navneet Lal v. Gokul (1976) – A testamentary document takes effect after the testator’s death, while a gift operates in praesenti.
    
  • P.K. Mohan Ram v. B.N. Ananthachary (2010) – A document must be examined as a whole to determine its nature.
    

2. Possession Is Not a Prerequisite for a Valid Gift

• Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act states that a gift of immovable property is valid upon registration.
  
• The donee’s acceptance (not possession) is the crucial factor.
  
• Case law relied upon:
  
  • Reninkuntala Rajamma v. K. Sarwanamma (2014) – Possession is not necessary for the validity of a gift.
    
  • K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam (2004) – A gift can be valid even if the donor retains possession for life.
    

3. The Gift Deed Could Not Be Unilaterally Revoked

• Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act states that a gift can only be revoked if:
  
  • The donor retains an express right of revocation, or
    
  • The donee agrees to a revocable gift at the time of execution.
    
• Since neither condition was met, the father’s unilateral cancellation was void.

• Case law relied upon:
  
  • K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam (2004) – A donor cannot revoke a gift unilaterally.

  • Satya Pal Anand v. State of M.P. (2016) – A gift deed must be challenged in a civil court, not revoked through administrative action.
    

VI. Conclusion & Implications

The Supreme Court’s ruling in N.P. Saseendran v. N.P. Ponnamma & Ors. (2025) reinforces three key principles:

1. Once a gift deed is registered and accepted, it is legally valid—even if possession remains with the donor.
   
2. A unilateral cancellation of a registered gift deed is void, unless explicitly provided for in the deed.
   
3. Revenue record mutations do not confer ownership; title is determined by registered documents.
   

VII. Practical Takeaways

• For Donors: Retaining possession does not make a gift deed revocable.
  
• For Donees: Acceptance of a gift need not be explicit—registering the deed suffices.
  
• For Property Transactions: Always ensure that property transfers are backed by registered sale or gift deeds to avoid disputes.
  

This ruling sets a strong precedent for property law disputes, particularly concerning family settlements and revocation of gifts. It aligns with existing judicial interpretations and strengthens the finality of gift transactions.

Stay informed with insights that matter. Follow us for more updates on key legal developments.