New Delhi, March 12 The Supreme Court on Thursday asked two petitioners, who had challenged a provision of a 1882 law that exempts gifts executed under Muslim law from registration, to approach the Law Commission of India.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant said the appropriate recourse for the petitioners would be to approach an expert body like the Law Commission of India, which has been entrusted with the responsibility of recommending suitable amendments in existing laws or for the enactment of new laws.
The counsel for the petitioners said that the plea challenged the constitutional validity of Section 129 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, as well as Section 2 of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937, concerning the word "gift".
He said that gifts made under Muslim personal law were exempt from paying stamp duty, while this exemption is not granted to non-Muslims.
The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, observed that if there was any loss to the public exchequer, the Parliament would be the competent forum.
"Parliament can always amend the law and bring a new law," the bench said.
The CJI asked why the petitioners had not approached any parliamentarian, pointing out that there was an element of alleged discrimination in the law.
The counsel said that there was an interplay between the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act.
"The conflict between personal law and fundamental rights, concerning the concept of gift, has to be determined by this court," he said.
The bench said that the law is of 1882.
"Suddenly in 2026, you remember that it violates Article 14, and when you remember it, you did not even deem it appropriate to inform those people who are best suited to rectify it," the bench said.
The CJI observed that the "best forum" would be the Law Commission.
"In our considered opinion, the appropriate recourse for the petitioners would be to approach the expert body like the Law Commission of India, which has been entrusted with the responsibility of recommending suitable amendments/changes in the existing laws and for the enactment of new laws, as may be required from time to time," the bench said.
It said that such an expert body is currently functional, so there is no reason to entertain the writ petition at this stage.
The bench dismissed the plea, granting the petitioners the liberty to approach the Law Commission.
