Report No. 66
8.47. Point (g)-Cancellation of statutory trust.-
The next question arising out of section 6 is this. Can the statutory trust arising under section 6 be revoked?
In a Sind case,1 it has been observed that the trust under section 6 cannot be revoked. The case2 was, however, one of assignment. The Court observed:
"This section is borrowed from the provisions of the English Act (Section 10, Married Women's Property Act, 1870), and there is a conflict in English law as to what the expression 'object' means. According to one view, the expression3 "object" means beneficiary; according to another view, it means purpose vide (1930) 2 Ch 37 and 1933 Ch 126.4"
"It seems to us that it is not necessary to deal with this conflict in the view I am taking of the effect of the deed of release. Section 6, Married Women's Property Act, provides that the policy money should not form part of the estate of the insured only so long as the object of the trust remains. But if the performance of the trust becomes impossible or the trust fails or otherwise is satisfied or comes to an end, the policy money will form part of the estate of the insured. In (1933) Ch 1265 Romer L.J. in construing section 11, Married Women's Property Act, 1882-corresponding to section 6 of the Indian Act-observed that the proviso meant that the policy money's shall not form part of the estate of the insured or be subject to his or her debts until the trusts have come to an end."
"Therefore, the trust can come to an end by revocation of it. Section 78(a), Trusts Act, provides that a trust can be revoked where all the beneficiaries are competent to contract by their consent. It was, therefore, perfectly competent to the several defendants to revoke the trust created by the policies in their favour. Under section 58, Trusts Act, it is also clear that it is competent for a beneficiary to transfer his interest. The interest taken by the several defendants under the policies, though contingent, can be transferred, because the right created under the policies is not in the nature of a mere right to sue: vide 8 Range 86. If the beneficiary is capable of transferring his interest, he can also release it."
1. Shamdas v. Savitribai, AIR 1937 Sind 181 (188).
2. Collier (in re:), (1930) 2 Ch 37: 39 LJ Ch 241: 143 LT 329.
3. For this point, see para. 8.58.
4. Cousins v. Sun Life Assurance Society, 1933 Ch 126: 102 LJ Ch 114.
5. Cousins v. Sun Life Assurance Society, 1933 a 126.
6. Mayait v. Official Assignee, AIR 1930 PC 17: 8 Range 8: 57 IA 10 (PC).
Back
