property whereunder an alternative plea of the gift deed being not enforceable, being not properly accepted can be permitted to be raised even as a plaintiff. But this is a suit only for cancellation of the gift deed on the ground that it is a fabricated one. There is no plea that the gift was not accepted and, therefore, it is not valid. The present argument cannot be entertained for the simple reason that it is the defendant that is said to have fabricated the gift deed and thereby showing that the defendant was associated with the gift and its acceptance, if once the due execution is proved. Apart from it, the law is very settled that the acceptance of a gift is need not be by actual delivery of possession and it can be by establishing about the property capable of being delivered. The original gift deed is in the custody of the defendant and it was produced by her. Unless there is acceptance of gift, it could not have been in her custody. Furthermore, the property is admittedly in the possession of the tenants and the plaintiff was said to have collecting the rents and paying the tax for some time. Therefore, a delivery of constructive possession of the property is also believable. In fact, in the evidence D.W.1 has stated that about five or six years back she accepted gift and this statement was given when she was examined on 08.11.2000 and the alleged gift deed was dated 26.02.1996. Therefore, the acceptance is specifically stated by her. She also claims to have made an application to the Municipality for mutation. She appears to be an illiterate and for her to mention the house property it is very difficult to expect. He evidence also goes to show that her father and plaintiff were collecting the rents and she was getting the money from them but about two years back the plaintiff has driven her out and he is collecting the rents. Therefore, it is quite clear that she also enjoyed the rents but it was the plaintiff that has been denying for obvious reasons. Therefore, from the material available on record, it is futile to contend that the gift is not valid for the reason that it was not accepted. There is sufficient proof of the custody of the original gift deed and acceptance of the same by D.W.1 and enjoyment of the rents from it for some time by her. Therefore, there are absolutely no merits in the appeal and the suit is rightly dismissed by the lower Court.
