Fatwa No : 83184
The ruling on a gift without transfer of ownership

The ruling on a gift without transfer of ownership

What do the esteemed scholars of religion and the respected Muftis of Shariah say regarding the following issue that there are three brothers, “A,” “B,” and “C.” Brother “B” wished to gift a house to “A.” For this purpose, “B” said: “I want to gift such-and-such house to you, ‘A.’ You may take the registry documents from ‘C’ and have the house transferred in your own name. All the registration expenses will have to be borne by you.”
However, “A” did not give any response to this statement of “B,” neither explicitly nor implicitly. He simply remained silent. He also did not instruct “C” to hand over the documents so that he could arrange the transfer. After sitting silently for a while, “A” stood up and left that gathering. Later, after some time, when all three of them gathered again in another sitting, “B” said to “A”: “I had given you one chance, but you wasted it, and now that matter is over.” Even on this occasion, “A” gave no response and remained silent. Now the question is: Was it necessary for “A” to accept the gift in the first gathering? Is explicit acceptance of a gift required, or is implied/indirect acceptance sufficient for the gift to be valid? If “A” now claims that the house has been gifted to him and that he is its rightful owner, will this claim hold valid according to Islamic law or not? Kindly provide guidance in this matter.

الجوابُ حامِدا ًو مُصلیِّا ً

According to the details mentioned in the question, the words spoken by “B” to “A” regarding the said house “I wish to gift this particular house to you”, without actually handing over possession of that house, merely express an intention to gift, not a formal and valid execution of the gift itself. Therefore, such a gift is not considered valid under Islamic law, and “A” did not become the owner of that house. Consequently, for “A” to now claim ownership of the said property is also incorrect, and he must refrain from doing so.

مأخَذُ الفَتوی

كما في حاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار): قلت: فقد أفاد أن التلفظ بالإيجاب والقبول لا يشترط، بل تكفي القرائن الدالة على التمليك كمن دفع لفقير شيئا وقبضه، ولم يتلفظ واحد منهما بشيء، وكذا يقع في الهداية ونحوها فاحفظه، ومثله ما يدفعه لزوجته أو غيرها قال: وهبت منك هذه العين فقبضها الموهوب له بحضرة الواهب ولم يقل: قبلت، صح لأن القبض في باب الهبة جار مجرى الركن فصار كالقبول ولوالجية. و في شرح المجمع لابن ملك عن المحيط: لو كان أمره بالقبض حين وهب لا يتقيد بالمجلس ويجوز قبضه بعده (5/ 688)۔
و في شرح المجلة للاتاسى : مادة ٨٦١: يملك الموهوب له الموهوب بالقبض . (ص: (١٦٦)۔
و في ملتقى الأبحر: هي تمليك عين بلا عوض وتصح بإيجاب وقبول، وتتم بالقبض الكامل اھ (ص: 489)۔
و في قواعد الفقه : لا يتم التبرع الا بالقبض اھ (ص ۱۰۸ ق، ۲۶۲) ۔