Written agreement not necessary
In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India in Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi & Others v. Syeda Arifa Parveen (2025 INSC 1187, decided on 07 October 2025) delivered a comprehensive ruling on the concept of gift (Hiba) under Muslim Law.
The Court emphasized that while a written document is not necessary to validate a gift, delivery of possession is an indispensable condition for its legal completion.
This decision reaffirms the traditional principles of Hiba—one of the most important modes of property transfer under Muslim Law.
Case Details
Case Title: Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi & Ors. v. Syeda Arifa Parveen
Citation: 2025 INSC 1187
Bench: Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah & Justice S.V.N. Bhatti
Date of Judgment: 07 October 2025
Court: Supreme Court of India
Appeal From: Karnataka High Court (Kalaburagi Bench)
Background of the Case
The dispute concerned agricultural land measuring 24 acres and 28 guntas in Gulbarga, Karnataka.
The plaintiff, Syeda Arifa Parveen, claimed that her mother, Khadijabee, had gifted 10 acres of land orally (Hiba) to her on 05 December 1988, followed by a memorandum of gift on 05 January 1989.
The defendants, however, denied any such gift and asserted ownership through registered sale deeds executed in 1995 by Khadijabee’s husband, Abdul Basit.
The key issue was whether the alleged oral gift was valid under Muslim law and whether possession was actually delivered to complete the Hiba.
Legal Questions Before the Court
1. Was the oral gift (Hiba) validly made and proved under Muslim Law?
2. Was delivery of possession established as required by law?
3. Could the High Court alter the Trial Court’s findings without a cross-appeal?
4. Was the plaintiff’s claim barred by limitation?
Supreme Court’s Observations
1. Essential Elements of a Valid Gift (Hiba)
The Supreme Court reiterated the three foundational conditions of a valid gift under Muslim Law:
1. Declaration of Gift by the donor (clear intention to give).
2. Acceptance of Gift by the donee (express or implied).
3. Delivery of Possession of the subject property—either actual or constructive.
“A gift under Muslim Law becomes complete and irrevocable only upon delivery of possession. Mere declaration without possession is legally ineffective.”
Supreme Court of India (2025 INSC 1187)
2. Written Document Not an Essential Requirement
The Court categorically held that a written deed or registration is not an essential requirement for a valid gift under Muslim Law.
“A written document is not an essential element of a Hiba. Even an oral gift is valid if the three requisites — declaration, acceptance, and delivery of possession — are satisfied.”
This position is supported by Section 129 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, which expressly excludes Muslim gifts from the requirement of registration under Section 123 of the Act.
Thus, a written agreement or memorandum, though permissible for record purposes, does not create or complete a gift in itself unless accompanied by delivery of possession.
3. Possession as the Core of Hiba
The Court clarified that delivery of possession is the heart and soul of a valid gift.
Without it, the Hiba remains incomplete even if reduced to writing or declared publicly.
In this case, since no evidence of delivery of possession or mutation in the donee’s name was produced, the Court held that the gift was never acted upon and hence invalid.
4. Documentary Proof and Limitation
The plaintiff failed to produce any documentary proof of possession, relationship, or mutation. The Court noted that mere oral statements by relatives were insufficient without corroboration.
Furthermore, the claim was filed 23 years after the alleged gift, which rendered it barred by limitation under Articles 58 and 59 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
Judgment Summary
The oral gift (Hiba) was held invalid for lack of delivery of possession.
The memorandum of gift (Ex. P-8) could not confer ownership.
The suit was barred by limitation.
The appeal was allowed, and the plaintiff’s claim dismissed.
—
Key Takeaways
A written document is not essential for a valid Hiba under Muslim Law.
Oral gifts are legally valid if accompanied by possession.
Delivery of possession is the decisive factor—without it, the gift is void.
Mutation entries, rent receipts, and tax payments are strong indicators of possession.
Courts closely scrutinize oral gifts made after the donor’s death. Long silence or inaction can render a claim time-barred under the Limitation Act.
Conclusion
The Dharmrao Sharanappa Shabadi judgment is a significant reaffirmation of the principles governing Hiba under Muslim Law.
It underscores that a Hiba is not about paperwork—it is about possession.
While written records like memoranda or acknowledgments may support the transaction, they cannot replace the actual transfer of possession, which alone gives legal effect to the gift.
For practitioners and property holders alike, this decision serves as a guiding precedent:
No writing is required, but possession is mandatory.
This article cover the question of law related to gift in muslim law also called as hiba landmark judgement are already there on this topic it is about essential elements of gift. further you can read here important judgements and legal principles laid down by Hon’ble supreme court of India, this article is posted by Advocate Shivaji Rathore (J&K high court jammu) for more important legal topics stay connected with us, on tacit legal we post on YouTube channel also named as Tacit Legal helpful for Law students newely enrolled Advocate in India and other states, Follow us on Instagram also, Read our articles on important Questions of Law. #tacitlegal visit my website Tacit Legal dot in search on google, this website is made from Hostinger and wordpress follow our latest updates for legal news follow us on YouTube also for young lawyers law students helpful for Advocates, this blog is written by Advocate Shivaji Rathore practicing in Jammu and Kashmir high court and district court at Jammu. The website Tacit Legal is available on Google created with Hostinger and wordpress keep in touch and read our daily articles and reporting for law students and advocates as we provide you important legal information on Tacit Legal.in
This article has been written by Advocate Shivaji Rathore, founder of Tacit Legal.
Follow for more updates on important legal judgments and constitutional developments from the courts of Jammu & Kashmir and India.
Author: Adv. Shivaji Rathore
Tacit Legal, Jammu
Visit: www.tacitlegal.in
Meta Title: Supreme Court on Hiba (Gift) in Muslim Law – Written Agreement Not Essential | Taacit Legal
Meta Description: The Supreme Court clarifies that a written agreement is not essential for a valid gift (Hiba) under Muslim Law. Delivery of possession remains the core requirement.
Keywords: Hiba, Muslim Law gift, oral gift under Muslim law, Supreme Court 2025, Taacit Legal, Shivaji Rathore Advocate, possession in Hiba, written document not required, property transfer under Muslim law
- Husband Cannot Evade Maintenance Liability Merely Because Wife Is Educated or Has Parental Support: Supreme CourtShivaji Rathore 04-Feb-2026 In a significant reaffirmation of women’s right to live with dignity after divorce, the Supreme
- Default in Filing Written Statement Does Not Mean Automatic Decree: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Order VIII Rule 10 CPC01-Feb-2026 In a significant ruling reaffirming foundational principles of civil justice, the Supreme Court of India has held
- Allahabad High Court Mandates Prosecution for False FIRs: Police Officers Face Liability for Non-ComplianceShivaji Rathore 30-01-2026 In a far-reaching and precedent-setting judgment, the Allahabad High Court has issued a strict mandamus
- Supreme Court Keeps UGC Promotion of Equity Regulations, 2026 in Abeyance; Revives 2012 FrameworkShivaji Rathore 29-01-2026 The Supreme Court of India on Thursday ordered that the University Grants Commission (Promotion of
- Supreme Court Clarifies Magistrate’s Powers Under Section 175(4) BNSS in Cases Against Public ServantsShivaji Rathore, 28-01-2026 The Supreme Court laid down an authoritative interpretation of Section 175(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
