Gift under Mohammedan Law is valid without registration if tripartite essential requirements are satisfied.

The Petitioner claims ownership of 01-05-5.5 acres of land in Survey No. 9/1A, Bachagao village, gifted to him by Mohammed Haji Abdul via a Gift Deed dated 06.03.2007

The parties are governed by Mohammedan Law.

The Petitioner applied to the Respondent (Tahsildar) to update his name in the Record of Rights based on the gift

On 11.02.2026, the Respondent issued an endorsement (Annexure-A) rejecting the application on the grounds that the Gift Deed was not registered

The Petitioner challenged this endorsement via a Writ of Certiorari and sought a Mandamus for the record update

1. Whether a gift of immovable property made by a person governed by Mohammedan Law requires registration under the Registration Act to be valid for the purpose of updating revenue records

Under Mohammedan Law, a gift (Hiba) of immovable property does not require a written instrument or registration to be valid, provided three essentials are met: (i) declaration by the donor, (ii) acceptance by the donee, and (iii) delivery of possession

Section 147 of Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law exempts such gifts from the Registration Act as established in Mahboob Sahab v. Syed Ismail [(1995) 3 SCC 693]

A written gift deed serves only as evidence of the gift and does not trigger mandatory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act if the three substantive requirements are satisfied (Rasheeda Khatoon v. Ashiq Ali [(2014) 10 SCC 459], Hafeeza Bibi v. Shaikh Farid [(2011) 5 SCC 654], and Mansoor Saheb v. Salima [2024 SCC Online SC 3809])

The Court found that the Tahasildar’s refusal to update the revenue records was based solely on the non-registration of the Gift Deed dated 06.03.2007

Applying the settled legal position from the Supreme Court, the Court reasoned that because the parties are governed by Mohammedan Law, the gift is complete upon declaration, acceptance, and delivery of possession regardless of a written or registered document

The Court noted that registration is not a requirement that "obviates the need for a gift to be reduced in writing" in this specific personal law context

Consequently, the Respondent's insistence on a registered deed was legally unsustainable and contrary to established precedents

The Court quashed the impugned endorsement dated 11.02.2026 (Annexure-A)

The Court issued a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent-Tahasildar to make the necessary changes in the revenue records pursuant to the Gift Deed dated 06.03.2007 within three weeks