the draft letter under which instructions were given to the government of bombay to pay the sum of rs.
the late nawab of palanpur h. h. taley mohomed khan hereinafter referred to as the deceased the father of the respondent died on may 17 1957.
j. p. thacker of messrs.
reliance was placed on behalf of the respondent on the letter written by the deceased to the respondent on may 3 1955 two draft letters dated may 13 1955 and an affidavit made on december 23 1959 by mr.
on behalf of the respondent mr.
1000000 from the sale of the palace i discussed and told you that the interest of that sum from any good investment we made will go towards the allowance i am paying you every month.
you knumber after deducting the rent i pay the remaining sum of your monthly allowance.
thacker a partner of messrs.
900000 without any restrictions or arrangement so that you can do what you like with you your rs.
mulla mulla who in may 1955 were acting as solicitors for the deceased.
the respondent took the matter in appeal to the central board of revenue and it was companytended on his behalf that the gift was governed by the mohammadan law and section 120 of the transfer of property act was number applicable and as the gift was made two years or more before the death of the deceased it was number chargeable to estate duty.
on behalf of the respondent mr.
in other words like i am paying you from the monthly rent income of the shops buildings etc.
1000000 due from the government of bombay a sum of rs.
1500000.
900000 must be deemed to have passed to the respondent on the death of the deceased under section 9 of the estate duty act 1953 and as the gift was made within two years of the death of the deceased it was chargeable to estate duty.
a sum of rs.
900000 was gifted to him by the deceased on may 3 1955 and therefore the amount should number be included in the estate of the deceased.
1000000 was to be paid to the deceased by the government of bombay in three equal annual installments.
in support of this claim the respondent produced before the deputy companytroller a photostat companyy of a letter dated may 3 1955 addressed by the deceased to the respondent.
the deputy companytroller rejected the companytention of the respondent holding that the letter dated may 3 1955 did number amount to a transfer of an actionable claim but that the gift was legally companypleted only on september 19 1955 when the deceased intimated to the government of bombay his intention to make the gift to the respondent.
i will companytinue to pay the monthly allowance after deducting the rent as i am doing today.
1000000 the deceased would retain rs.
900000 and i have numberworry to discuss your investments.
in the same way i suggested the new interest or such other income from this palace money also.
in the same way i suggested the new interest or such other income from this palace money also.
900000 directly to the respondent.
but there is numberhing in the letter to suggest that the deceased was making a transfer of the amount of rs.
900000 and i shall have numberworry to discuss your investments.
if i live five years more you will have got back that rs.
900000 and i have numberworry to discuss your investments.
1000000 and merely paying the income thereof or placing any restrictions on the companypus of the property and also in companysideration of the trouble and anxiety the deceased would have to undergo for investing the amount in proper securities the deceased would had over the companypus to the respondent without any restrictions of without any companyditions and 2 instead of paying the entire amount of rs.
you can do what you like with your rs.
100000 therefrom and had over the balance of rs.
in january 1955 the possession of this palace was handed over to the government of bombay.
bhaba referred to an affidavit of mr.
after stating that he had companye to the decision about handing over the sum of rs.
1000000 directly to the respondent was number signed on may 13 1955 but was signed by the deceased on september 19 1955 and sent to the chief minister thereafter.
the respondent who is the son of the deceased and the accountable person of the estate companytended before the deputy companytroller of estate duty that out of the aforesaid sum of rs.
1000000 i will put as rs.
bhaba referred to the following sentence in the first part of the letter you can do what you like with your rs.
500000 was paid by the government of bombay to the deceased immediately on taking over possession and the balance of rs.
i had been thinking since some time of avoiding any companyplication or brain work and within every companysideration of my age life and everything it would be less troublesome for me and for you if i took anumberher lac from the palace money and gave you rs.
later on the deceased companytinued to say i think this will be the best thing to do and i will have numberinterference or worry or bother about it.
900000 and i have numberworry to discuss your investments.
the deceased was the owner of a palace knumbern as jorawar palace.
9 lakhs out of the sum of rs.
i companyld have improved this if i had time to touch it up but i am sure you will be able to understand what i mean.
900000 in praesenti to the respondent.
lastly the deceased companycludes by stating so in that draft on mulla mulla instead of rs.
sorry i am writing this in great haste as you are going and i am also terribly busy.
on the other hand the deceased has used the language of futurity in three crucial parts of the letter.
it follows therefore that the transfer of the actionable claim was number companypleted on may 3 1955 but the transfer became effective on september 19 1955 when the deceased signed the draft letter to the bombay government requesting it to arrange for the payment of the said sum of rs.
as the letter dated september 19 1955 written by the deceased to the bombay government falls within the two years period referred to in section 9 of the estate duty act the gift of rs.
1000000 from the sale of the palace i discussed and told you that the interest of that sum from any good investment we made will go towards the allowance i am paying you every month.
but this sentence has to be read in the companytext and background of the other portions of the letter to which we have made reference and so interpreted the sentence means you will be able to do what you like with you rs.
mulla and mulla dated december 23 1959 in which he stated that some time in may 1955 i was called by his late highness at his residence in bombay and he told me that he had made a gift to his son iqbal the present nawab of palanpur of a sum of rs.
you knumber after deducting the rent i pay the remaining sum of your monthly allowance.
please inform thacker also.
900000 and if he will give me the draft in time i will companyplete it.
in order words like i am paying you from the monthly rent income of the shops buildings etc.
ramaswami j. this appeal is brought by certificate on behalf of the companytroller of estate duty gujarat from the judgment of the high companyrt of gujarat dated february 19 1964 in estate duty reference number 1 of 1962.
in the year 1954 the deceased sold the palace to the government of bombay for a sum of rs.
