Concept of “Gift” under provisions of Muslim Law

From a legitimate perspective, the term gift alludes to a certain and deliberate exchange of property starting with one individual then onto the next. Under Muslim Laws, a Gift or Hiba is “move of property, made quickly, and with no trade, by one individual to another, and acknowledged by or for the benefit of the last mentioned. It is, the exchange of portable or undaunted property with quick impact and without thought by one individual called contributor, to someone else called donee”. Hindu law characterizes blessing as “the making of someone else’s exclusive just after the eradication of one’s own restrictive right in the topic of the blessing”. Blessing has been characterized in The Transfer of Property Act, 1882 under Section 122 as, “the exchange of certain current versatile or ardent property made deliberately and without thought, by one individual, called the giver, to another, called the donee.”

Under the Muslim law they are just usufructuary intrigue (and not privileges of responsibility for kind). There is no distinction between the few schools of Islamic law in their basic origination of property and proprietorship. A restricted intrigue removes impact from the usufruct under any of the schools. There are a few varieties of Hiba. This paper includes the brief idea of how “gift” has been accustomed in the provisions of Muslim law as including the different varieties of “gifts”, the importance of gifts in the Muslim law and how exactly a gift is given and also considered.

Keywords: Gift, Consideration, Hiba, Transfer, Donee.


The concept of the expression “gift” as utilized in the Transfer of Property Act is, to some degree, unique in relation to the training under the Muslim Law. Under the Muslim Law, a “gift‟ is a trade of “property” or “right” by one individual to another according to the courses of action given under Muslim law are of two sorts Hiba and Aria. Hiba (Tamlik al ain), is a quick and genuine exchange of the responsibility for property or of some right, with no thought or with some arrival (ewaz) and Aria (Tamlik al manafe) is the award of some constrained enthusiasm for the regard of the utilization or “usufruct” of some property or right. Where a “gift” of any “property” or “right” is made without thought with the object of securing strict legitimacy, it is called sadaqah. The expressions “Hiba” and “gift” are frequently unpredictably utilized. Yet the term “Hiba” is just one of the sorts of exchanges which are secured by the overall term “gift”. A “gift” by a Muslim man for his co-religionist must be under the Muslim Law. Muslim law perceives the distinction between the corpus and the usufructs of a property. Corpus, or Ayn, implies without a doubt the privilege of responsibility for property which is heritable and is boundless in the purpose of time. In contrast, usufructs or Manafe, implies the option to utilize and appreciate the property. It is restricted and isn’t heritable. The endowment of the corpus of a thing is called Hiba, and the endowment of just the usufructs of a property is called Ariya.

“Gift” as characterized under Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act is the exchange of certain current moveable or immoveable property made deliberately and without thought, by one individual, called the benefactor, to get acknowledged by or for the benefit of the donee. It is required to be a wilful exchange of property to another made needlessly and without thought. This area applies to those gifts that are gifts bury vivos or a flat out “gift”. Property under the above area can be both portable and relentless yet anyway must be substantial in nature. To establish a substantial “gift”, there must be a current property as effectively prior expounded.

Types of Gift

  1. Hiba bil Iwaz

    Hiba implies blessing and Iwaz implies thought. Hiba Bil Iwaz implies present for thought previously got. It is hence an exchange comprised of two shared or complementary endowments between two people. One present from benefactor to the donee and one from donee to giver. The blessing and return blessing are autonomous exchanges which together make up.

    In India, it was presented as a gadget for influencing an endowment of Mushaa in a property fit for the division. So a Hiba Bil Iwaz is a present for thought, and truly it is a deal. Along these lines, enrolment of the blessing is fundamental, and the conveyance of ownership isn’t essential, and denial against Mushaa doesn’t exist. Coming up next are imperatives of Hiba bil Iwaz – Actual instalment of thought with respect to the donee is vital. In Khajoorunissa versus Raushan Begam[1], held that ampleness of the thought isn’t the inquiry. As long as the thought is genuine, it is substantial regardless of whether it is lacking. A certifiable point regarding the promoter to strip himself of the property is essential. Blessing in lieu of dower obligation – In Gulam Abbas versus Razia[2], Allahabad High Court held that an oral exchange of resolute property worth more than 100/ – can’t be truly made by a Muslim spouse to his better half by the method of blessing in lieu of dower obligation which is likewise more than 100/ -.
  2. Hiba ba Shartul Awaz

    Shart implies specification and Hiba ba Shart ul Iwaz implies a blessing made with a specification for return. Not at all like in Hiba bil Iwaz, the instalment of thought is delayed. Since the instalment of thought isn’t quick, the conveyance of ownership is fundamental. The exchange becomes last quickly upon conveyance. At the point when the thought is paid, it accepts the character of a deal and is dependent upon assumption (Shufa). As in deal, either gathering can restore the subject of the deal if there should be an occurrence of a deformity. It has the accompanying essentials: conveyance of ownership is important; it is revocable until the Iwaz is paid; it gets irreversible after the instalment of Iwaz; exchange when finished by instalment of Iwaz, accept the character of a deal.
  3. Hiba bil mussa

    Mushaa implies a unified offer in a property. The endowment of the unified offer in an inseparable property is substantial under all schools. Yet, there is no unanimity of conclusion among various schools about the endowment of a unified offer in a property that is detachable. In Shafai and Ithna Asharia laws, it is legitimate if the giver pulls back his authority over the property for the donee. In any case, under Hanafi law, such a blessing is invalid except if it is isolated and conveyed to the donee.

Importance of gift

A presentation by the benefactor – There must be an unmistakable and unambiguous expectation of the giver to make a blessing. Acknowledgement by the donee – A blessing is void if the donee has not given his acknowledgement. The legitimate gatekeeper may recognize in light of a legitimate concern for a minor. Transport of possession by the supplier and taking off the proprietorship by the donee. In Muslim law, the term ownership implies just such belonging as the idea of the subject is prepared to do. In this manner, the genuine trial of the conveyance of ownership is to see who – regardless of whether the giver or the donee – receives the rewards of the property. If the contributor is receiving the reward, at that point, the conveyance isn’t done, and the blessing is invalid. Another attribute of Muslim law is that composing isn’t basic to the legitimacy of a “gift” both of portable or resolute property.

In Smt Hussenabi vs Husensab Hasan[3], a granddad proposed blessing to his grandkids. He additionally acknowledged the proposal for the benefit of minor grandkids. Be that as it may, no express or suggested a significant grandson made acknowledgement. The Karnataka High Court held that since the three components of the blessing were absent on account of the significant grandkid, the blessing was not legitimate. It was substantial with respect to the minor grandkids.

The donor

Giver’s forces are unlimited in Muslim law-A man may legitimately make a “gift” of his property to another during his lifetime, or he may part with it to somebody after his passing by will. The first is known as an aura bury vivos and the second a testamentary mien. Muslim law grants the two sorts of auras, yet while a manner bury vivos is free as to quantum and testamentary attitude is constrained to 33% of the net home.

The general guideline is that a donor’s option to blessing is unhindered. In Ranee Khajoorunissa v. Mst Roushan Jahan 1876, it was perceived by the Privy Council that a benefactor might bless all or any segment of his property regardless of whether it antagonistically influences the hopeful beneficiaries. Notwithstanding, there is one special case that the privilege of the endowment of an individual on a death bed (Marz ul maut) is limited in following ways – He can’t blessing more than 33% of his property and he can’t blessing it to any of his beneficiaries.

Any individual fit for holding property, which incorporates a juristic individual, might be the donee of a blessing. A Muslim may in like manner make a genuine gift to a non-muslim; donee must be in nearness at the hour of giving the gift; in case of a minor or psychotic, the proprietorship must be given to the legal guardian regardless the gift is void; gift to an unborn individual is void aside from if the presentation of the child happened inside a half year of the gift. Notwithstanding, an endowment of future usufructs to an unborn individual is substantial given that the donee is in being the point at which the intrigue opens out for beneficiaries. The donee is the individual who acknowledges the “gift”, by or in the interest of an individual who isn’t able to contract.


Acceptance might be made explicitly or impliedly by direct, yet acknowledgement would be pointless for a situation where a gatekeeper makes the “gift” to his ward. Muslim law doesn’t abstain from the need for acknowledgement of the “gift” even in situations where the donees are minors. On the off chance that the donees are minors, it might be that the proof of acknowledgement should be drawn closer regarding that reality. However, that doesn’t imply that no confirmation of proof of acknowledgement is fundamental on account of a “gift” for a minor. A minor who has accomplished caution (sareer) may acknowledge the „gift‟ significantly after it has been dismissed. He may likewise decline to acknowledge the “gift”. The words’ acknowledged by or for the benefit of the donee show that the donee might be an individual unfit to communicate acknowledgement. A “gift” can be made to a kid en ventre se minor and could be acknowledged for its sake.

There was a difference of view between the two schools of Hindu law with regards to the need of acknowledgement of the “gift” by the donee, Dayabhaga holding that it was a bit much but rather Mistakshara holding the opposite. This area has altered the indigenous Dayabhaga law. An exchange of stock to the name of the donee vests the property in him subject on his right side to renounce the “gift”,  even though he is uninformed of the exchange and this is so despite the fact that the “gift” is grave. The donee must be an ascertainable individual, so a “gift” can’t be made to an unregistered society.

It is fundamental to the legitimacy of a “gift” that there ought to be a conveyance of such belonging as the subject of the “gift” is defenceless of what conveyance the property is able to do and whether such conveyance as the property is equipped for has been given would rely on the specific realities for each situation. The benefactor ought to strip himself totally of all proprietorship and domain over the subject of the “gift”. The conveyance might be productive or genuine. Under Muslim law, it isn’t essential that there must be a real conveyance of ownership to make a z’s “gift‟ legitimate. At the point when a “gift” is made, as the person giving the gift here needs to have the free decent with the proper acknowledgement of the “gift”, which is with his proper knowledge and complete assured permission without any intention.  A Hiba is a without a doubt move of some determinate thing or a spiritual right. It is important that such a thing or right should be in the presence and can be moved right away. Additionally on account of a “gift” of usufruct (Aria) produce (Manafe) alludes to rights which gather from the everyday in future. Such produce or utilization of a thing becomes property molecule by molecule as it is brought into being. The manafe may in this way be moved by the contributor during his lifetime by “gift” or by inheritance and be the subject of “gift‟ despite the fact that they are not in presence at the hour of the “gift”.

Any oral “gift” of steadfast property can’t be made taking into account the arrangements mentioned under Section 23 of the Transfer of Property Act. Negligible conveyance of ownership without a composed instrument can’t give any right. However, under Islamic law, an oral “gift” is reasonable. In any case, to comprise a substantial “gift”, the benefactor ought to strip himself totally of all possession and domain over the subject of “gift”. It is the basic additional duty of the donee to ensure that it only demonstrates the acknowledgement of a donor to accept the “gift” by his concern.


A “gift” is an exchange. Be that as it may, it doesn’t contain any component of thought. The complete nonappearance of money related thought is the principle, trademark, which recognizes a “gift” from an award, deal, trade, or some other exchanges for significant or satisfactory thought. Where there is any likeness advantage estimated as far as cash in regard to a “gift‟, the exchange stops to be a “gift”. Love, love, profound advantage and numerous different components may enter in the goal of the giver to make a “gift”. The word ‘thought’ has not been characterized in the T.P. Act, however, implies equivalent to in the Contract Act barring regular love and warmth. If not, and if the exchange included thought, the exchange would add up to a deal inside the significance of Section 54 or to trade inside the significance of Section 118. The pith of a “gift” bury vivos must be without ‘thought’ of the nature characterized in Section 2(d) of the Contract Act. A “gift” in lieu of giving a profound advantage to the benefactor isn’t exchanged with thought, however, is to be treated as a “gift”. Where a mother gift’s property to her solitary little girl, who vows to keep up the previous for a mind-blowing duration, the guarantee isn’t enforceable in law in light of the fact that the “gift” must be for normal love and fondness and not for any thought. A minor might be a donee, and the minor’s characteristic watchman can acknowledge the “gift” for the minor. Be that as it may, if the “gift” is grave, the commitments can’t be authorized against the minor during his minority. Be that as it may, on his achieving lion’s share, the minor must acknowledge the weight or return the “gift”. The donee can even be a youngster in its mom’s womb.


The concept of the expression “gift” and topic of “gift” has been a deep-rooted and customary issue which has formed into an unmistakable aspect in property law. Various viewpoints identified with “gift” in property act and its differentiation with the Muslim law and its suggestions have been the significant topic of this article. In considering the law of gift’s, it is to be recollected that the English word “gift‟ is nonexclusive and must not be mistaken for the specialized term of Islamic law, Hiba. The idea of Hiba and the expression “gift” as utilized in the exchange of property act, is unique. Muslim law and its suggestions have been the idea of this report. In thinking about the law of gift’s, it is to be recollected that the English word blessing is extremely expansive and must not be mistaken for the specialized term of Islamic law, Hiba. The idea of Hiba and the term blessing as utilized in the exchange of property act, are extraordinary.

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. What is the importance of registration of the “gifts” under Muslim law?
  2.  What is the subject matter of Hiba under Muslim law?
  3.  How can a “gift” be revoked under Muslim law?
  4.  What are the customary differences between Mahomedans and others?
  5.  What is the constitutional validity of Hiba?
  6.  How the stature of “gift” under Muslim law related to the classification of property under Transfer of property act?


  1., accessed on 4/08/2020
  2., accessed on 4/08/2020
  3., accessed on 4/08/2020
  4., accessed on 5/08/2020
  5., accessed on5/08/2020
  6., accessed on 5/08/2020
  7. Kesari, U.P.D., ‘Modern Hindu Law’, Central Law Publications, Allahabad, 2007, p431.
  8. Sinha, R.K., ‘Muslim Law’, Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2006, p172.

[1]  CIVIL APPEAL NO.2845 OF 2006

[2] AIR 1951 All 86

[3] AIR 1989 Kant 218

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *