P L D 1966 W (PLP)

In this case, the donees fall in the following three categories :‑

(a) wife; (b) two widowed daughters; and . (c) son. So far as the wife is concerned, the law and the rulings are quite clear that when a gift is made b a husband in favour of his wife, the change of possession is not necessary for the comple tion of the gifts. In the case of wife, the gifts have, therefore, to be assumed to be complete on the day they were made. So far as the daughters are concerned, the learned counsel for the respondent has contended before me that they are widowed daughters living with the donor and, therefore, the condition about the change of possession would not be applicable in the case of gifts made in their favour also. In support thereof two affidavits have been produced. These affidavits are in the nature of admission in favour of the person making it and, therefore, have no evidential value. I am afraid, I cannot hold that, in the case of these two daughters, the position was such that the condition about the change of possession was not necessary for the completion of the gift. So far as the son is concerned, the 'learned counsel for the respondent has produced three documents namely, Exh. R‑I, Exh. R‑II and Exh. R‑III. Exh. R‑III is an agreement to sell wheat by the donee Nawab Nasrullah Khan to Bashir & Co. This agreement does not say from which portion of the land the wheat was to come. The learned counsel for the respondent has contended that I should presume that the wheat was coming from the land in dispute on the ground that the seller was shown to be a resident of Ghafoorwah. I am afraid, mere mention of residence is not sufficient to establish that the wheat was coming from the land in dispute. Exh. R‑I is a receipt given to Nawab Nasrullah Khan by Bashir & Co. In this case also, it cannot be established that the wheat which was given by Nawab Nasrullah Khan to Bashir & Co., came from the land in dispute. The next document produced is Exh. R‑II which is a letter given by the Australasia Bank Limited on the 22nd of January 1963. It says that Cheques for Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 10,000 were issued by Messrs Bashiruddin & Co., to Nawab Nasrullah Khan on 23rd June 1958. In this letter, only cheques are mentioned. There is no mention of the wheat or the land in dispute. In these circumstances, I cannot hold that the gifts were complete before Martial Law in the case of the son, Nawab Nasrullah Khan. As a result of this analysis, I direct that the gifts in favour of the wife only would be validated so far as Mutation Nos. 60 and 61 mentioned above are concerned. As regards the gifts made through these mutations in respect of the daughters and the son, no validation shall be allowed. S. Q. Order accordingly.