Perpetual succession
sridhar pasumarthy
(Querist) 03 November 2011
This query is : Resolved
Respected Experts,
A woman executed a registered settlement deed in favour of her fostered and unmarried son enabling him to enjoy a house for his life time and after his life time, his wife(to be married)till her lifetime. Thereafter their children, if any for their life time and their children so on. If they could not begot children, property should go to the heirs of his wife after her lifetime.
With these recitals a settlement deed was executed.
My questions are :-
1. whether such a settlement is valid or void. If so, under which provision of law?
2. If it is valid, who will get absolute rights, though document is silent about it?
pls advise me.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 04 November 2011
Such a document is void and violates section 14 of the Transfer Of Property Act,which embodies the Rule against perpetuity IN FOLLOWING WORDS:
"No transfer of property can operate to create an interest which is to take effect after the life-time of one or more persons living at the date of such transfer, and the minority of some person who shall be in existence at the expiration of that period, and to whom, if he attains full age, the interest created is to belong."
IN SUCH A SITUATION AS TESTAMENTARY DIRECTION CAN NOT BE GIVEN EFFECT TO,THE LAW OF SUCCESSION APPLICABLE TO PARTIES WOULD BE GIVEN EFFECT TO.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 04 November 2011
It would of interest to know about the origin and development of the the Rule against perpetuity which is often described as one of the most complicated legal rules ever!
It's origin stems from the days of feudal England - some say as early as 1680 - when landowners often tried to control the use and disposition of property beyond the grave - a concept often referred to as control by the "dead hand."
The rule against perpetuities was intended to prevent people from tying up property - both real and personal - for generation after generation. In feudal England, the practice was to put land in trust in perpetuity, with succeeding generations living off the land without actually owning it. The catalyst for this practice was the avoidance of certain taxes which were being levied upon the transfer of land upon the death of the owner. Perpetual trusts avoided the tax, but many people argue that the practice had the deleterious effect of concentrating large amounts of wealth among a few members of society.
The rule against perpetuities, then, was designed to insure that some person would actually own the land within a reasonable period of time after the death of the transferor. To accomplish that result, the rule stated that no interest in property would be valid unless it could be shown that the interest would vest, if at all, no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest.
Although the rule appears to be straightforward, it has become one of the most complicated legal rules for this reason: the rule requires, with absolute certainty, that an interest in property will vest no later than 21 years after some life in being at the creation of the interest. If there is any possibility that the interest will not vest during that period, then the gift fails ab initio, i.e. from the time the document creating the interest takes effect. For wills, it is the time of the Testator's death. For trusts, it is the time the transaction is complete.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/83339
.
ITS ABOUT ORIGIN N POSITION IN UK.
sridhar pasumarthy
(Querist) 04 November 2011
Prabhakar Singhji,
Thanks a lot for giving valuable and speedy advice.
I, being a member advocate of this club, really feel proud of sharing knowledge with experts in the profession of law.
I expect the same contribution from u, Ajay Sethiji, Makkad ji etc. in future.
