If you give a costly gift, you can never get it back!

HC has upheld the verdict of the lower court and stated the donee has the full right over the gift given by the donor One given by the doner and accepted by the donee, the donor, cannot stake claim on that gift Donor has no right over the gift if he/she has not mentioned any condition in the gift deed

Once a gift is given by the donor that is accepted by the donees, it cannot be revoked by the donor for any reason, said the Hyderabad High Court. The HC dismissed a plea made against the verdict Guntur’s lower courts and said the judgement was valid.

Thus, as the High Court also upheld the verdict of the lower court which says the donee has the full right over the gift given by the donor through a gift deed. One given and accepted, the donor cannot stake a claim on that gift. Thus before making the gift deed, think twice!

As per Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act, if the gift is conditional and done has not accepted it legally, then donor has a chance of revoking the gift.

In this particular case, the donor had written the property to his wife and daughters through a gift deed. It was not a will, but a gift deed. According to the document, his wife would enjoy his complete property after his death. Following his wife’s death, the property will go to daughters, without any right and alienation.

But unexpectedly, his wife died before him and daughters staked a claim in his gift deed, i.e., property. But the father filed a case stating that both his daughters did not look after the mother and himself, so he wanted to revoke the gift deed.

After a few years, the donor mentioned that the complainants (daughters) had obtained the gift deed by inducing and misrepresenting them. Based on this argument he executed a sale deed in the name of a third person.

But when considered properly, it was found that the donor while writing the gift deed did not have any conditions to transfer the property in the name of his wife and children. Thus his claim of inducing was found to be false.

Thus the court rules that he cannot sell the property to the third person.