Report No. 57
6.26. Third alternative.-
The third is the least drastic alternative, and would make the matter depend on the intention of the parties,-with the qualification that a specific provision requiring the court to draw a rebuttable presumption of advancement in the case of near relatives will be introduced. The practical advantage of such a provision will be its elasticity.
Section 82, Trusts Act could be revised on the following lines1:-
"Where property is transferred to one person for a consideration paid or provided by another person, and it appears that such person did not intend to pay or provide such consideration for the benefit of the transferee, the transferee must hold the property for the benefit of the person paying or providing the consideration:
Provided that the fact that the transferee is a near relative of such other person shall not, of itself, be regarded as a sufficient ground for drawing an inference that such other person did not intend to pay or provide such consideration for the benefit of the transferee,2 and in such cases the court shall presume that such other person intended to pay or provide such consideration for the benefit of the transferee."
1. This is only a very rough draft.
2. Exception for co-parceners etc. could be made.