by Girija Kuer was executed in their favour. However, the specific plea on behalf of the appellants, in this regard, is that the gift deed was not legally valid as it was vitiated by fraud. The law is well settled that the allegation of fraud will make a transaction only voidable and the same will remain valid till it is cancelled by a competent court. In the facts of the present case, no ‘presumptive invalidity’ can be attached to the gift deed in question. The donor Girija Kuer or for that matter the appellants were required to bring a suit for cancellation of the gift deed within three years from the date of the execution of the gift deed or from the date when the facts entitling them to obtain the requisite relief against the gift deed first became known to them. Noteceably, however, even in the T.S. No. 278/1992 filed by the appellants, no relief has been claimed against the gift deed in question before claiming the relief for declaration of their title over the suit property. It would be fruitful here to notice the dictum, in this regard, as laid down by the Apex Court in Md. Nurul Hodda vs Bibi Raifunnisa & Anr 1996(7) S.C.C 767 as follows:-
