HIBA: CONCEPT, FORMALITIES, CAPACITY, REVOCABILITY

This article is written by Kimaya J. Anavkar of K.C Law College, Mumbai University, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

ABSTRACT

This paper provides a comprehensive exploration of Hiba, a significant concept in Indian Muslim personal law. Hiba, derived from the Arabic word “hibbah” meaning gift, refers to the voluntary and immediate transfer of property from a donor to a recipient without any expectation of reciprocity. Rooted in Islamic principles of generosity and compassion, Hiba serves as a mechanism for wealth redistribution and expression of goodwill.

The paper delves into the essential components of a valid Hiba, including the declaration of intent by the donor, acceptance by the recipient, and delivery of possession. It also examines the legal capacity requirements for both the donor and recipient and explores the conditions under which a Hiba can be revoked.

Furthermore, the paper highlights key developments in Hiba law in recent years, including landmark court cases and legislative amendments that have shaped its interpretation and application. By providing a detailed analysis of Hiba, this paper aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of this important legal concept and its implications for individuals and society.

KEYWORDS

Hiba, Islamic law, Indian Muslim personal law, gift, property transfer, donor, recipient, legal capacity, revocation, Islamic jurisprudence, Shariah, Quran, Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, landmark cases.

INTRODUCTION

Hiba, a concept deeply ingrained in Indian legal tradition and Islamic law, refers to the altruistic act of voluntarily transferring property from a donor to a donee without any consideration. This act of generosity permits individuals to bestow their property to loved ones or charitable organizations during their lifetime. Hiba covers a broad spectrum of property transfers, including real estate, movable assets, and interests in property.

Despite its benevolent nature, Hiba necessitates specific legal formalities to ensure its validity and enforceability. Execution of a valid Hiba requires a clear declaration of gift from the donor, expressing an unambiguous intent to transfer the property. The donee should then accept the gift, demonstrating their willingness to receive the property. Often, physical delivery or symbolic acts representing delivery are necessary to finalize the Hiba transaction.

Furthermore, both donor and donee must possess the legal capacity to enter into such transactions. The donor’s mental capacity and legal competence to comprehend the implications of their gift are assessed, while the donee must be capable of accepting and managing the gifted property.

While Hiba is generally irrevocable, exceptions may occur under certain circumstances, such as the inclusion of a revocation clause, mutual agreement, or specific legal grounds for revocation. The term ‘Hiba’ carries a narrower connotation in Mohammedan law than the term ‘gift’ in English law, where the latter applies to all transactions involving property transfers without consideration.

DEFINITION AND CONCEPT OF HIBA

Hiba, a term originating from the Arabic word “hibbah” meaning gift, is a significant concept in Indian Muslim personal law. Hiba, an Arabic term signifying ‘gift’ or ‘donation’, is a fundamental concept in the Indian legal system, particularly within Muslim personal law. It describes the voluntary and immediate transfer of property from a donor to a recipient without any expectation of reciprocity. This practice, deeply rooted in Islamic principles of generosity, charity, and compassion, allows for the redistribution of wealth and serves as an expression of goodwill or the fulfilment of moral obligations.

The concept of Hiba is referenced in the Quran, specifically in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 271, which extols the virtues of charitable giving without expectation of return. This act of benevolence is governed by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937[1], which stipulates that Hiba should be freely willed by the donor, without coercion or undue influence, and necessitates the donor’s relinquishment of ownership rights, which the recipient must accept.

Several court rulings have further elucidated the concept of Hiba. For instance, in Mohd. Yasin Khan v. Mohd. Yasin (1924)[2], Hiba was defined as a voluntary property transfer predicated on the donor’s free will. In contrast, Abu Taher v. Noor Jahan Begum (1958) [3]stressed the need for an unequivocal intention to transfer ownership rights. Akbar Ali Khan v. Shah Muhammad & Ors. (1997)[4]affirmed that a valid Hiba must be voluntary, accepted by the recipient, and result in the donor’s total divestment of property rights. Any conditions attached to the gift would invalidate it.

Additionally, Hiba can be revoked if the donor has reserved this right, as per Sayed Shah Sufi Ajmal Ali Sahib v. Mohamed Abdul Gani (2008)[5]. However, once accepted, the gift becomes irrevocable unless exceptional circumstances, such as fraud or misrepresentation, exist.

In essence, Hiba is a significant aspect of Indian Muslim personal law, allowing for the voluntary transfer of property without consideration, grounded in both the Quran and the Shariyat. It encourages acts of charity and benevolence and, when understood properly, enables individuals to express their generosity within the legal framework. A Hiba or inter vivos gift is a donation from one living person to another, allowing the recipient to reap certain benefits. It is an immediate, unconditional transfer of property without any exchange of consideration, accepted by or on behalf of the recipient.

While the terms ‘gift’ and ‘Hiba’ are often used interchangeably in India, it’s crucial to note that ‘gift’ has a broader connotation than ‘Hiba’. Under Mohammedan law, Hiba is treated as a contract involving an offer made by the donor and accepted by the donee. When the gift encompasses the entire property, it is termed a Hiba, whereas a gift of only the property’s usufructs is called an ‘Ariyah’.

FORMALITIES FOR HIBA

In Islamic jurisprudence, the validity of a ‘Hiba’ or gift is contingent upon the fulfilment of three key conditions: the declaration of intent by the donor, acceptance by the recipient, and the delivery of possession.

• Declaration:

The donor must express, without ambiguity, their intention to gift. This declaration must be voluntary and free from coercion, fraud, or undue influence. Any gift made under such conditions would be deemed null and void.

• Acceptance:

The recipient’s acceptance of the gift is equally critical. This acceptance underlines the recipient’s intention to assume ownership of the property. Without acceptance, the gift remains incomplete. In cases involving minors or individuals of unsound mind, the lawful guardian may accept the gift on their behalf. If a gift is made to a group of individuals, all members must be identifiable, and each must separately accept the gift. However, even if the shares of each recipient are not specified or individually given, the gift can still be valid; in such instances, the recipients share the property as tenants-in-common.

• Delivery of possession:

The delivery of possession is a vital aspect of a valid Hiba. This means that the gift becomes effective only when the recipient has taken possession of the property, not when the intent to gift was declared. Islamic law mandates that the donor must completely divest themselves of both ownership and possession in favour of the recipient for the gift to be complete. Even if the gift is documented, it is considered void without the delivery of possession.

The method of transferring ownership of a property varies depending on its type. For tangible, movable goods like a laptop, actual delivery is possible. However, for immovable or intangible property, the delivery is merely symbolic or constructive. For instance, handing over the keys and related documents of a house signifies the transfer of ownership.

In Islamic contract law, a valid gift requires three elements:

1. An offer (izab),

2. Acceptance (qabul), and

3. Transfer (qabza).

A case in point is Smt Hussenabi vs Husensab Hasan AIR 1988 Kar[6], where a grandfather’s gift to his adult grandson was deemed invalid due to the absence of these elements. However, the gift to his minor grandchildren was valid as their guardian had fulfilled the necessary conditions.

When delivery of possession not an essential

Under Mohammedan law, a gift is typically invalid without the transfer of possession, particularly with immovable property. However, exceptions exist.

For instance, when the donor and recipient cohabit the same property, as seen in Hayatuddin vs. Abdul Gain and Ors. (1974)[7], the gift is valid without formal delivery, given the donor’s genuine intent to transfer ownership. Similarly, when spouses gift property to each other, physical possession isn’t mandatory, as validated by the Bombay High Court in Ma-Mi vs. Kallander Ammal (1926)[8] and Gujarat High Court in Fatmabibi W/D Abdulkarim Haji vs. Abdulrahman Abdulkarim (2000)[9].

Gifts between co-sharers are also valid without actual delivery, provided the donor’s intent is bona fide. Partial delivery of a gift can infer delivery of the remaining properties. If the gift involves Zamindari villages or parcels of land, the transfer of rents and incomes and mutation of names can effectuate the gift. Lastly, if the recipient already possesses the property, only the donor’s declaration and recipient’s acceptance are needed, as in the case of a father transferring a car to his son.

To summarize, a valid Hiba under Muslim Law necessitates a clear declaration by the donor, acceptance by the recipient, and the delivery of possession. The gift is deemed void if any of these conditions are not met, underlining the importance of each element in the process.

CAPACITY OF PARTIES IN HIBA

The capacity of parties involved in Hiba transactions, or Islamic gifts, plays a pivotal role in ensuring their validity and enforceability. In the context of Indian law, the capacity of both the donor and the recipient is determined by Islamic law principles and the stipulations in the Muslim Personal Law.

The Quran, particularly Surah Al-Baqarah (2:282), underscores the significance of mental capacity and legal competence in contractual dealings, including Hiba transactions. The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, the primary legislation governing personal laws for Muslims in India, further outlines the legal capacity required for a valid Hiba transaction.

Section 129 of the Act specifically addresses Hiba capacity, stating that any Muslim of sound mind and legal majority has the capacity to make a valid gift of their property. This provision ensures that a Muslim meeting these criteria can transfer their property as a gift to another person.

To validate a Hiba, both the donor and the recipient must possess the necessary capacity. The donor must be of legal age, sound mind, and free from any mental incapacity that could hinder their understanding of the gift’s consequences. They should also be capable of making a voluntary and informed decision to transfer the property as a gift.

Similarly, the recipient must also be legally competent and capable of understanding and accepting the implications of receiving the property as a gift. They should also be of legal age and sound mind.

The interpretation of Islamic law by different schools of thought may influence the required capacity for various actions. The Quran, along with the Muslim Personal Law, provides guidance on these capacity requirements for Hiba.

The concept of capacity is divided into two categories: mental and financial. A sound-minded person capable of assessing the legal implications of his actions is eligible to grant Hiba. However, a Hiba offered by a person of unsound mind during lucid intervals is considered valid, provided their decision wasn’t influenced by coercion or fraudulent influence.

Financial capacity allows a person in insolvent circumstances to make a gift or Hiba according to the Hanafi School. However, if the Hiba is made to defraud the recipient, it can be declared void. The primary intent must be to transfer property to the recipient, not to defraud them.

The right to render a Hiba arises when transferring property. A Muslim doesn’t have the right to give away property they don’t own. For example, a tenant or guest can’t give away a building because they don’t own it. Such a gift is considered null. However, a Muslim has the right to give away all their properties they possess at the time of the gift announcement. It’s also essential that the donor owns the property they want to pass on to the recipient.

REVOCATION

The complexity of Hiba, or the gifting of property under Islamic law, lies in its revocability. The Quran, specifically Surah Al-Baqarah (2:180), offers guidance on this matter, suggesting that an individual’s right to allocate property through a will before their death indicates the revocability of gifts during one’s lifetime.

The revocability of Hiba is primarily influenced by the intentions and conditions set by the donor, as outlined in the Muslim Personal Law. A Hiba can be revoked if the recipient fails to fulfil the conditions stipulated by the donor at the time of the gift. For example, if the donor gifts a property on the condition that the recipient will provide financial support to the donor during their lifetime, and the recipient fails to do so, the donor may revoke the gift.

There exist certain circumstances under which a gift becomes unequivocally irrevocable. This includes instances where either the donor or recipient has passed away, or when the recipient is related to the giver by degrees of consanguinity deemed inappropriate. Notably, under Shia law, any gift given to a blood relative is irrevocable. Furthermore, if a marital bond exists between the donor and recipient, the gift can’t be retracted. However, in Shia law, a gift exchange between spouses is indeed revocable. Other scenarios include the recipient transferring the gift to another party, the gift being lost or altered beyond recognition, or its value increasing inseparably. Gifts given as ‘sadqa’, denoting charitable or religious gifts, and those where the donor has received something in return, are also irrevocable.

Under the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 in India, a Hiba can be revoked by the donor during their lifetime, provided there is a valid reason. These reasons may include ingratitude or misbehaviour by the recipient, non-fulfilment of conditions specified in the Hiba, or any other legitimate ground recognized under Islamic principles.

Furthermore, if the ownership of the gifted property has not been effectively transferred to the recipient, revocation becomes relatively easier. However, if the transfer of ownership has already taken place and the recipient has become the rightful owner, revoking the Hiba can be more complicated.

Muslim lawmakers have also classified gifts under two main categories: revocation of gifts prior to the delivery of possession and revocation after the delivery of possession. According to Muslim law, all donations are revocable before the recipient is granted possession. After the delivery of possession, the revocation of a gift requires a court order.   

The Shia and Sunni laws differ on the revocability of gifts. In Shia law, a gift may be revoked without court proceedings by a mere declaration by the donor, and a gift given to a spouse or a relative, whether within the prohibited degrees or not, is revocable. In Sunni law, revocation of gifts typically requires a formal legal process.

In conclusion, the revocability of Hiba is a complex issue governed by the intentions and conditions set by the donor, the fulfilment of these conditions by the recipient, and the specific laws and regulations of the Islamic sect to which the parties belong.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HIBA AND GIFT UNDER MUSLIM LAW

In Muslim law, there exist two concepts pertaining to property transmission that bear certain similarities yet hold distinct differences; these are ‘Hiba’ and ‘gift’. Essentially, both refer to a voluntary act of giving, wherein a property or any tangible item is transferred from a donor or giver to a recipient without any monetary return or consideration. Both Hiba and gift rely on the fundamental presumption of the donor’s genuine intent to grant, display of acceptance by the recipient, and appropriate transfer and delivery of the item or property. Put simply, both serve as manifestations of the beneficence and generosity of the donor.

However, the two concepts diverge in several ways under the purview of Muslim law. A ‘Hiba,’ derived from Arabic, means ‘donation’ or ‘gift’. It signifies the spontaneous transfer of ownership of existing personal property or rights from the donor, known as ‘wahib’, unto the done or ‘mawhub lahu,’ out of the donor’s free will, for no consideration or compensation. The Islamic law stipulates that a Hiba requires explicit declaration and immediate effect; it cannot be precedent on a future date or event. In Hiba, delivery of possession, either directly or constructively, is an unequivocal requirement for the Hiba’s validity, and the donor must divest total control and possession during their lifetime.

On the other hand, the term ‘gift’ in Muslim law resonates closely with the definition of Hiba, yet it isn’t bound by the same rigid constructs. The ‘gift’ entails an altruistic act, where the giver voluntarily transfers a property or right without expecting any return. However, unlike Hiba, a gift doesn’t necessarily require realization during the lifetime of the donor, it can be made effective from a future date, or it could be contingent on a specific eventuality. Also, the delivery of possession, though considered a recommended practice in gifting, does not invalidate the gift if it hasn’t been effected, provided that the done has accepted the gift.

Further, an essential distinction lies in relation to the revocability of Hiba and gift. In Muslim law, Hiba, unless made irrevocable by conditions imposed by the donor at the time of the creation, is generally revocable. However, this revocation must occur before the done gains complete control over the property, post which the donor loses the authority to revoke the gift. In contrast, the revocation of a gift is subject to greater flexibility and can be withdrawn at any time before it is accepted by the receiver.

These differences enlighten us about the nuanced aspects of Muslim law pertaining to Hiba and gift. Both, while seeming to represent the same act of giving at a glance, have fundamentally different legal implications and fulfil different purposes in the grand scheme of property disposition under Muslim law. Therefore, each must be appropriately understood and exercised as per their distinct provisions and requirements.

RECENT PROGRESS IN HIBA LAW

The legal landscape of Hiba law in India has been significantly reshaped in recent years due to a series of legislative amendments and landmark rulings. Here, we highlight key developments:

1. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019[10]:

Enacted by the Indian Parliament, this act, also known as the Triple Talaq Act, aimed to address instant triple talaq. It also impacted Hiba law by declaring instant triple talaq void and illegal, thus safeguarding Muslim women’s rights in Hiba transactions by preventing arbitrary revocation.

2. Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014)[11]:

The Supreme Court clarified that a valid Hiba can be made to a charitable or public trust, provided Hiba requirements are met. This ruling emphasized Hiba’s legitimacy in transferring property to such trusts, ensuring their continued support.

3. Fathimath Suhara v. Musthafa (2001)[12]:

The Kerala High Court affirmed the validity of conditional Hiba gifts, stating that the fulfilment of set conditions determines the gift’s validity. This judgment underscored the importance of reasonable and lawful conditions in Hiba transactions.

4. Nahar Mohammed Abdul Latif v. Tabasum Azhar (2016)[13]:

The Bombay High Court ruled that a gift made by a convert to Islam, pre- or post-conversion, is valid. This ruling affirmed that conversion to Islam doesn’t affect the validity of Hiba made by the convert, ensuring equal Hiba rights for converts.

5. Zameer Ahmed Khan v. State of Karnataka (2020)[14]:

The Supreme Court ruled that a Hiba made during a matrimonial dispute can be valid if not intended to defeat the other party’s claims. This clarified that Hiba made during such disputes can be upheld if made for valid reasons and not to evade legal obligations.

These developments underscore the evolving nature of Hiba law, reflecting a growing recognition of the rights of parties involved in Hiba transactions and efforts to ensure fairness and protection.

LANDMARK CASES AND LEGAL INTERPRETATION OF HIBA UNDER MUSLIM LAW

While there have been numerous landmark cases and legal interpretations of Hiba under Indian Muslim law, it’s essential to acknowledge the fluidity of the legal landscape. Here are some key cases that have fundamentally shaped the understanding and application of Hiba in India:

1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) AIR 1985 SC 945[15]:

This case revolved around the maintenance of a divorced Muslim woman. The Supreme Court of India, invoking Section 125 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure, stated that Muslim women are entitled to maintenance beyond the iddat period, irrespective of personal laws. This case underscored the importance of financial support for women, and raised questions about the interplay between Hiba and maintenance obligations.

2. Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) AIR 2001 SC 3958[16]:

This case examined the rights of divorced Muslim women to maintenance under Section 3(1)(a) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The Supreme Court ruled that Hiba cannot supplant maintenance, highlighting the husband’s sustained responsibility to meet the basic needs of his divorced wife.

3. Shamim Ara v. State of U.P. (2002) AIR 2002 SC 3551[17]:

This case deliberated on the legality of oral Hiba and the necessity for registration. The Supreme Court ruled that the transfer of property through Hiba can be executed orally and does not necessitate registration. The court underlined the importance of the donor’s clear intention to gift the property and the recipient’s acceptance.

4. Shah Muhammad Abdul Rehman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra (2013) AIR 2013 SC 181[18]:

This case reiterated the legality of oral Hiba and the non-requirement for registration. The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of the donor’s clear intention to gift the property and the recipient’s acceptance.

5. Mohd. Hidayatullah v. Shakila Begum, AIR 2019 SC 3286[19]:

This case examined the revocability of a Hiba due to the donor’s financial dependence on the recipient. The court held that financial dependence alone does not warrant the revocation of a Hiba, thereby reaffirming the importance of the donor’s intention and the conditions agreed upon at the time of the gift.

6. Akbar Ali Khan v. Muhammad Ali Khan & Ors., (1909) 4IND. CAS.23[20]:

This case highlighted the necessity of physically transferring ownership in a gift transaction. The court declared that the actual physical transfer of possession is crucial for the completion of a Hiba, without which the gift remains incomplete.

7.  Mohammad Hesabuddin & Anr vs Md. Hesaruddin & Ors AIR 1984 GAUHATI 41[21]

This case is related to a “Hiba” or gift made by a Muslim. The case discusses the validity of a Hiba and the requirements for its execution under Muslim Law. The court held that a Hiba is valid if it is made out of love and affection, and if the donee has accepted it and taken possession of the property. The case also discusses the concept of “Hiba-bil-Iwaz” or a gift in return for consideration, which is also valid under Muslim Law.

8. Masum Ali vs Abdul Aziz (1914) ILR 36ALL268[22]

In this case, the court held that the essentials of a valid Hiba under Muslim law are: (i) declaration of the gift by the donor; (ii) acceptance of the gift, express or implied, by or on behalf of the donee, and (iii) delivery of possession to and taking over possession by the donee actually or constructively.

9. Sahabzada Saiduzzafar vs Ausaf Ali ILR (1933) Lahore 606[23]

In this case, it was held that under Muslim law, a gift may be revoked by the donor at any time before delivery of possession. However, once possession has been delivered, the gift can only be revoked with the consent of the donee or by a decree of the court.

CONCLUSION

Hiba, a cornerstone of Islamic law, enables the voluntary, irrevocable transfer of property, driven by love, affection, or goodwill. This article delves into the intricacies of Hiba, examining its definition, formalities, the legal capacity of parties, revocability, and key judgments that have shaped Hiba law. The Quran and Shariah provide the foundational principles for Hiba, with Surah Al-Baqarah (2:177) emphasizing the essence of giving selflessly. Muslim personal law further outlines the legal framework for Hiba in India.

To validate a Hiba transaction, the donor must declare the Hiba, the donee must accept, and the possession must be delivered. The legal capacity of both parties is critical, with the courts stressing sound mind, adulthood, and free consent. While Hiba is typically irrevocable, exceptions exist for fraud, misrepresentation, or unfulfilled conditions. Landmark judgments have played a pivotal role in interpreting Hiba law, ensuring fairness and justice. Recent developments in Hiba law, including the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, have enhanced the protections for Muslim women and addressed arbitrary revocation of Hiba.

In conclusion, Hiba, a significant Islamic law concept, facilitates property transfer through voluntary, irrevocable gifts, guided by love, affection, and goodwill. Balancing the rights of the donor and ensuring fairness in Hiba transactions is crucial for this mechanism of wealth distribution and social welfare promotion.

REFERENCES

1. Ameer Ali, Mohammedan Law, Vol. I, p. 173.
2. Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937.
3. Lex peeps. “A Brief Overview on the Concept, Formalities, Capacity and Revocability of Hiba.”https://lexpeeps.in/a-brief-overview-on-the-concept-formalities-capacity-and-revocability-of-hiba/ Accessed September 10, 2024.
4. Ipleaders. “Hiba (Gift) Muslim Law.” https://blog.ipleaders.in/hiba-gift-muslim-law/ Accessed September 11, 2024.
5. Legal Service India. “Hiba Under Muslim Law.” https://legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4560-hiba-under-muslim-law.html  Accessed September 11, 2024.
6. Law Bhoomi. “Gift Under Muslim Law.” Gift under Muslim Law (lawbhoomi.com) Accessed September 11, 2024.

---

[1] The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 [online].

[2] Mohd. Yasin Khan v. Mohd. Yasin (1924) [online].

[3] Abu Taher v. Noor Jahan Begum [online].

[4] Akbar Ali Khan v. Shah Muhammad & Ors. (1997) [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1811702/

[5] Sayed Shah Sufi Ajmal Ali Sahib v. Mohamed Abdul Gani (2008) [online].

[6] Smt Hussenabi vs Husensab Hasan AIR 1989 Kar [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/53337/

[7] Hayatuddin vs. Abdul Gain and Ors. (1974) [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1996242/

[8] Ma-Mi vs. Kallander Ammal (1926)  [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/511357/

[9] Fatmabibi W/D Abdulkarim Haji vs. Abdulrehman Abdulkarim (2000) [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/175092/

[10] The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019 [online]. Available at: https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/11564/1/a2019-20.pdf

[11] Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014) [online]. Available at: https://blog.ipleaders.in/shabnam-hashmi-vs-union-of-india-ors-2014/#:~:text=The%20Shabnam%20Hashmi%20case%20is,the%20framers%20of%20the%20Constitution.

[12] Fathimath Suhara v. Musthafa (2001) [online]. Available at: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/641e380c55698b4b395cc5fc

[13] Nahar Mohammed Abdul Latif v. Tabasum Azhar (2016) [online].

[14] Zameer Ahmed Khan v. State of Karnataka (2020) [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/63807355/

[15] Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) AIR 1985 SC 945 [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/823221/

[16] Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) AIR 2001 SC 3958 [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/410660/

[17] Shamim Ara v. State of U.P. (2002) AIR 2002 SC 3551 [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/332673/

[18] Shah Muhammad Abdul Rehman Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra (2013) AIR 2013 SC 181 [online]. Available at: https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/all-about-hiba-under-muslim-law–15872.asp#:~:text=Shahmohammad%20Abdul%20Rehman%20Shaikh%20v,and%20does%20not%20require%20registration.

[19] Mohd. Hidayatullah v. Shakila Begum, (2019) AIR 2019 SC 3286

[20] Akbar Ali Khan v. Muhammad Ali Khan & Ors., (1909) 4IND. CAS.23 [online].

[21] Mohammad Hesabuddin & Anr vs Md. Hesaruddin & Ors AIR 1984 GAUHATI 41 [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1328172/

[22] Masum Ali vs Abdul Aziz(1914) ILR 36ALL268 [online]. Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1192359/

[23] Sahabzada Saiduzzafar vs Ausaf Ali ILR (1933) Lahore 606

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.