AIR 2011 SUPREME COURT 3609 ::(2011) 2 CLR 583 (SC) ::(2011) 2 HinduLR 239 ::(2012) 1 CivLJ 569 ::(2011) 3 All RentCas 18 ::2011 (9) SCC 223 ::(2011) 8 Scale 186 ::(2012) 1 CalLT 8 ::(2011) 89 All LR 236 ::(2011) 5 Cal HN 350 ::(2011) 5 All WC 4353 ::(2012) 3 Bom CR 816 ::(2012) 2 CgLJ 47 ::(2012) 2 Guj LR 1063 ::(2011) 4 ICC 256 ::(2011) 4 Mad LW 341 ::(2011) 7 Mad LJ 789 ::(2011) 3 Ker LT 504 ::(2012) 1 Raj LW 352 ::(2012) 113 AllIndCas 251 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : AIR 2008 (NOC) 1126 (Kerala))

Hon'ble Judge(s): Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph, Surinder Singh Nijjar , JJJ

Muslim law - Relinquishment of future share in property - Heir expectant receiving advantage for giving up his future right in property - Cannot be allowed to claim benefit of doctrine of "spes successionis" as embodied in S.6 of Transfer of Property Act (1882) - He would be estopped from claiming share in the inheritance. Transfer of Property Act (4 of 1882) , S.6— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.115— Ordinarily there cannot be a transfer of spes successionis, but in the exceptions pointed out by this Court in Gulam Abbas's case (AIR 1973 SC 554) (supra), the same can be avoided either by the execution of a family settlement or by accepting consideration for a future share. It could then operate as estoppel against the expectant heir @page-SC3610 to claim any share in the estate of the deceased on account of the doctrine of spes successionis. Having accepted the consideration for having relinquished a future claim or share in the estate of deceased, it would be against public policy if such a claimant be allowed the benefit of the doctrine of spes successionis. In such cases, the principle of estoppel would be attracted.(Para 19 20 23 24 25) .....