{"id":7653,"date":"2026-06-23T10:52:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-23T05:22:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lawfultalks3.selfst.art\/can-an-oral-gift-transfer-a-house-delhi-hc-gives-a-clear-answer\/"},"modified":"2026-07-21T17:41:54","modified_gmt":"2026-07-21T12:11:54","slug":"can-an-oral-gift-transfer-a-house-delhi-hc-gives-a-clear-answer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawfultalks3.selfst.art\/?p=7653","title":{"rendered":"Can an Oral Gift Transfer a House? Delhi HC Gives a Clear Answer"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Delhi High Court recently held that an oral gift of immovable property does not confer ownership rights. The court reiterated that under section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a valid gift of immovable property can only be made through a registered instrument signed by the donor and attested by witnesses.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

Court Rejects Oral Claims:<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

The observation was made by Justice Vikas Mahajan while deciding a family property dispute involving a residential property in Delhi’s Model Town. The Court rejected the defendants’ claims that parts of the property had been orally gifted and that the property had been orally partitioned between two brothers.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

The court ultimately passed a preliminary decree declaring that the plaintiff, Anil Kumar Gupta, owns a 5\/6th share in the property, while the legal heirs of his late brother, Ashok Kumar Gupta, collectively own the remaining 1\/6th share.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

Who Inherited the Property?<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

The property originally belonged to Jagdish Prasad Gupta, who purchased it through a registered sale deed and died intestate in 1993. His wife, Savitri Devi, also passed away without leaving a will in 1997. They were survived by six children, two sons and four daughters. Under the applicable succession laws, each child inherited an equal 1\/6th share in the property.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

Plaintiff’s Claim:<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

According to the plaintiff, three of his sisters and another sister, who has since passed away, executed registered relinquishment deeds in 2011 and 2018, giving up their shares in his favour. Based on these deeds, he claimed ownership of 5\/6th of the property.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

Defence Version:<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n

The legal heirs of Ashok Kumar Gupta, who were impleaded as defendants, opposed the suit. They argued that around thirty years ago, there had been an oral family partition under which:<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n \n \n \n