Jagdish Chander v. Satish Chander & Ors.
Background
A mother executed a Will in 1991 dividing land between her two sons, and shortly after, executed a registered gift deed giving additional land to one son (the appellant). The other son (the plaintiff) sued, alleging the gift deed was fraudulently obtained and that the land was ancestral property to be inherited under Kangra customary law. The trial court and first appellate court both dismissed the suit, finding no fraud and holding the gift deed valid, but the Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a second appeal, reversed this and decreed the suit, holding the gift deed was invalid because it was supposedly made for monetary consideration (Rs 5,000), contrary to the Transfer of Property Act's requirement that a gift be without consideration.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and restored the trial court's dismissal of the suit, holding that the High Court had misread the documents: the Rs 5,000 figure in the gift deed and the mutation record was merely the stamp-duty/registration valuation of the property, not consideration paid to the donor. Since no consideration was actually proven, the gift deed did not violate Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act and remained valid. The Court also held that the High Court, sitting in second appeal under Section 100 CPC, had wrongly re-appreciated evidence and reversed concurrent factual findings without identifying any genuine substantial question of law.
Lesson Learnt
A stated property "valuation" figure on a gift deed (used for stamp duty) is not the same as consideration paid to the donor, and conflating the two can wrongly invalidate an otherwise valid gift; separately, High Courts cannot re-weigh evidence and overturn concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal unless a genuine substantial question of law is involved.