Unit III — Will, Hiba, Wakf & Pre-emption
“A hiba is a gift by one person to another of some specified thing without any exchange.” — Hedaya
The Muslim Will (Wasiyat) — Two Great Limits
A Muslim will (Wasiyat) needs no signature, no witnesses, no formality — it may be oral or written. But its content is tightly constrained by two rules designed to protect the fixed Quranic shares of heirs.
flowchart TD
ROOT["Muslim Will (Wasiyat)"]:::root
ROOT --> LIM["Two Key Limitations"]:::branch
ROOT --> ESS["Essentials"]:::branch
LIM --> L1["1/3 Rule:<br/>Only 1/3 of estate<br/>by will (without heirs' consent)"]:::limit
LIM --> L2["No bequest to<br/>Legal Heirs<br/>(without other heirs' consent)"]:::limit
L1 --> L1A["Excess over 1/3 = VOID<br/>unless all heirs consent<br/>AFTER death"]:::effect
ESS --> E1["Competent testator<br/>(adult, sane)"]:::ess
ESS --> E2["Valid legatee<br/>(in existence at death; not killer)"]:::ess
ESS --> E3["Valid subject matter<br/>(existing property)"]:::ess
ESS --> E4["No formality required<br/>(oral or written)"]:::ess
classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:2px,color:#000;
classDef branch fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
classDef limit fill:#F8D7DA,stroke:#721C24,color:#000;
classDef effect fill:#FFF3CD,stroke:#856404,color:#000;
classDef ess fill:#D4EDDA,stroke:#155724,color:#000;
linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;
The bequeathable-third rule: a Muslim may bequeath only up to one-third of the net estate (after debts and funeral expenses) without the heirs’ consent; the excess is void unless all legal heirs consent after the testator’s death (pre-death consent is ineffective — Md. Raza v. Abbas Bandi Bibi, 1932). No bequest to a legal heir is allowed without the other heirs’ post-death consent, since that would distort the divine faraid shares (Nawazish Ali Khan v. Ali Raza Khan, 1948). A death-bed gift (marz-ul-maut) — made under apprehension of death, by one who actually dies of that illness — is treated as a will and capped at the bequeathable third.
Hiba (Gift) — Delivery of Possession is Everything
flowchart TD
ROOT["Hiba (Muslim Gift)"]:::root
ROOT --> ESS["Three Essentials"]:::branch
ROOT --> KINDS["Kinds of Hiba"]:::branch
ROOT --> MUSHA["Musha Doctrine"]:::branch
ESS --> E1["Declaration (Ijab)<br/>by donor"]:::ess
ESS --> E2["Acceptance (Qubul)<br/>by donee"]:::ess
ESS --> E3["DELIVERY OF POSSESSION<br/>(Qabza)<br/>Mandatory — no delivery = void"]:::critical
KINDS --> K1["Hiba-bil-Iwaz<br/>(gift for a return gift)<br/>Irrevocable"]:::kind
KINDS --> K2["Hiba-ba-Sharat-ul-Iwaz<br/>(gift on condition of return)"]:::kind
KINDS --> K3["Sadaqah<br/>(charitable gift) — Irrevocable"]:::kind
MUSHA --> M1["Undivided share:<br/>gift VOID if property<br/>is divisible (classical)"]:::musha
MUSHA --> M2["Exceptions:<br/>non-partitionable property;<br/>commercial venture"]:::musha
classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:2px,color:#000;
classDef branch fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
classDef ess fill:#D4EDDA,stroke:#155724,color:#000;
classDef critical fill:#F8D7DA,stroke:#721C24,stroke-width:2px,color:#000;
classDef kind fill:#FFF3CD,stroke:#856404,color:#000;
classDef musha fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;
Hiba is an immediate, gratuitous transfer of ownership requiring three essentials: declaration (ijab), acceptance (qubul), and — the decisive one — delivery of possession (qabza). Unlike a transfer under the Transfer of Property Act, registration cannot substitute for delivery: a registered but undelivered gift is void (Md. Hesabuddin v. Md. Hesaruddin, 1984; Ilahi Samsuddin v. Jaitunbi, 1995). Kinds include Hiba-bil-Iwaz (gift for a return gift — effectively a sale, irrevocable once complete) and Sadaqah (charitable, irrevocable). Under the doctrine of Musha, a gift of an undivided share in divisible property is classically void for want of possession — but valid where the property is not capable of partition (a small house, a bath, a boat) or where modern courts find actual delivery of the undivided whole (Hayatuddin v. Abdul Gani, 1976).
Wakf and the Mutawalli
A Wakf is the permanent dedication of property by a Muslim for a religious, pious, or charitable purpose; ownership vests in Allah and the property is “locked” forever — it can never be sold, mortgaged, or transferred (S.3, Wakf Act 1995).
flowchart TD
ROOT["Wakf"]:::root
ROOT --> ESS["Essentials"]:::branch
ROOT --> TYPES["Types"]:::branch
ROOT --> MUT["Mutawalli"]:::branch
ESS --> E1["Competent Waqif<br/>(adult Muslim owner)"]:::ess
ESS --> E2["Permanent dedication<br/>(Ta'bid)"]:::ess
ESS --> E3["Religious / Pious /<br/>Charitable purpose"]:::ess
TYPES --> PUB["Public Wakf<br/>(mosque, school, hospital)"]:::type
TYPES --> PRIV["Private Wakf (Wakf-ul-Aulad)<br/>Valid if ultimate benefit<br/>is public (1913 Act)"]:::type
MUT --> M1["Manager — NOT owner"]:::mut
MUT --> M2["Powers: manage, receive<br/>income, grant short leases"]:::mut
MUT --> M3["CANNOT sell/mortgage/<br/>alienate without court leave"]:::mut
classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:2px,color:#000;
classDef branch fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
classDef ess fill:#D4EDDA,stroke:#155724,color:#000;
classDef type fill:#FFF3CD,stroke:#856404,color:#000;
classDef mut fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;
A private family wakf (Wakf-ul-Aulad) was struck down in Abul Fata Mohd. v. Russomoy Dhur Chaudhuri (1894) where public benefit was too remote — but the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act, 1913 restored its validity provided there is an ultimate dedication to public/charitable purposes when the family line ends. The Mutawalli is a manager, not an owner: he administers the property and applies its income to the wakf’s purpose, may grant only short leases, and cannot sell, mortgage, or alienate wakf property without the court’s permission (Board of Wakfs v. Javed, 2011); a woman may be a mutawalli, a non-Muslim may not.
Pre-emption (Shufa) is the right of an owner to buy a neighbouring property on the same terms when it is sold to an outsider — claimable by a co-sharer, a participator in appendages, or (under Sunni law) a neighbour, subject to strict and immediate formalities (the two demands: talab-i-mowasibat and talab-i-ishhad).
✏️ Sample Solved Problem (IRAC Method)
Problem: ‘A’ executed a deed of gift of a dwelling house in favour of ‘B’. The gift deed was duly registered, but possession of the house was never delivered to ‘B’. After A’s death, B claims the house; A’s heirs resist. Is the gift valid?
I — Issue
Whether a registered but undelivered gift of immovable property is valid under Muslim law.
R — Rule
- The three essentials of a valid hiba are declaration, acceptance, and delivery of possession (qabza)
- Registration cannot substitute for delivery — without qabza the gift is incomplete and void (Ilahi Samsuddin v. Jaitunbi, 1995)
A — Analysis
The decoy is the registration. Under the Transfer of Property Act a registered instrument completes a gift of immovables — and a student trained on general property law will instinctively say the gift is good. But Muslim personal law is different and stricter: it demands actual (or constructive) delivery of possession, and treats registration as legally irrelevant to a hiba. Since A never delivered possession to B, the third and most critical essential is missing. The gift never became complete in A’s lifetime, so the house remained A’s property and, on his death, devolved on his heirs.
C — Conclusion
The gift is invalid for want of delivery of possession. The house belongs to A’s heirs, not to B — registration alone could not perfect the hiba.
📄 The full PDF bundle has more problems for Unit III — including the will-to-a-neighbour bequeathable-third scenario, the unsigned-will-prepared-by-attorney problem, the Wakf-ul-Aulad validity question, the Shia-claims-pre-emption fact-pattern, the complete Master Case List, and 16-mark essay blueprints for Will, Hiba, Wakf and Pre-emption. Get the bundle — ₹149