When property can be transferredfor the benefit of unborn person.

Answer :-
According to section 5 of the Transfer
of Property Act , property can be
transferred in favour of living person .
Therefore , a transfer can not be made
directly in favour of an unborn person .
Under the English law as well as Indian
law a child in mother’s womb is
considered to be in existence . But a
child who is not in mother’s womb is
considered to be not in existence . But
section 13 ,14 and 18 of the Transfer of
Property Act deal with the law with
respect to the transfers for the benefit
of an unborn person .
Section 13 embodied the rule against
double possibilities what is known in
England as the rule in Whitby Vs.
Mitchell . Section 14 of the Transfer of
Property Act controls section 13 .
Section 13 lays down that where on a
transfer of property , an interest therein
is created for the benefit of a person
not in existence at the date of the
transfer , subject to a prior interest
created by the same transfer , the
interest created for the benefit of such
person shall not take effect , unless it
extends to the whole of the remaining
interest of the transferor in the
property .
Such an interest may be created for the
benefit of an unborn person if the
following conditions are fulfilled ---
1) Interest of the unborn person must
be preceded by a prior interest .
2) When the prior interest comes to an
end , the unborn person must be in
existence and he must have the interest
at the latest when he attains majority.
3) The whole of the remaining interest
of the transferor in the property must
be comprised in the interest created for
the benefit of such unborn person .
Section 13 has further illustrated the
matter in the like manner .
Where A transfers property , of which he
is the owner , to B in trust for A and his
intended wife , successively for their
lives , and , after the death of the
survivor , for the eldest son of the
intended marriage for life , and after his
death for A’s second son , the interest
so created for the benefit of the eldest
son does not take effect , because it
does not extend to the whole of A’s
remaining interest in the property .
Therefore , the effect of section 13 is
that there can not be a direct transfer to
a person who is not in existence , or
unborn person , on the date of the
transfer . It is for this reason that the
said section uses the expression ‘for
the benefit of’ and not ‘ transfer to an
unborn person ‘.