Can anyone explain this sentence !
 

[B]Acceptance of gift of a debt by the debtor[/B]

The gift a debtor, the debt or its release to a debtor or his heirs is valid without acceptance. But it becomes in operative if the debtor refuses to accept it!


P.S i dont know whether these authors are trying to look very knowledgeable as personally i think that language or vocab used in books should be of simplest form so that one would not waste half of his time to look for the meaning of the words used by authors.

As a general Gift is not completed only upon declaration by donor but it is completed upon its acceptance by donee along with delivery of possession.

The writer simply says that when a creditor (donor) discharges a debtor from his liability as a gift, such gift does not require acceptance by debtor (donee).

For example,

you owe Rs.100 to Mr. A.

Mr.A writes an email to you that I have gifted you that Rs.100 and you are no more liable to return me any debt. This is gift of debt and would result in release of debtor. Now if before receiving acceptance from you Mr. A try to cancel the gift on the ground that it is not yet completed owing to lack of acceptance, he cannot because such gift does not require acceptance.

According to writer such gift does not require acceptance of debtor and would be completed on the declaration of gift by creditor only. However, if the debtor do not like to accept it he may refuse it. Then it will become inoperative.

The language is very simple probably there is some typing error in the sentence hence it seems confusing.

By the way would you share the name of book , writer with edition and page where you have read it.

Please note , I don't know how far this rule of gift of debt without acceptance is authentic.

thanks alot for your valuable answer now its clear, i am not a student of law so going trough its terminologies for the first time thats why i am not getting things easily.

the book title is : Muslim Law and Jurisprudence
Author : Dr M Jamal Abbasi
Page: 58 Last 2 lines !

He is giving lectures at Officers academy lahore and recommended his own book but after 1 month i quit the academy.

Muslim law and juriprudence by DF Mullah is good, book by AA faizee is also easy to understand you can easily find these books in any library.
If you are in lahore i will suggest you to visit PULC and ask any student to give you notes on Muslim law and jurisprudence if you are finding it tough to understand terminologies of islamic law

(6) Nothing shall debar a wife whose marriage has been terminated by talaq effective under his
section from remarrying the same husband, without an intervening marriage with a third
person, [B]unless such termination is for the third time so effective[/B]

Ok can anyone explain the actual meaning of the words in BOLD !

Regards!

Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961
 

These words have been added in the context of [I]Halala[/I] which requires a wife to get married with someone else before getting married with his previous husband who has divorced him. Further there is no halala in the case of two divorces and the couple may remarry without halala however, if the third divorce is given then the woman will be debarred from marrying his husband without halala.

Now coming to section 7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1971, it says that talaq will not become effective unless notice thereof is given to the Chairman Union Council and 90 days have been passed since serving such notice. For example if A gives talaq to his wife on April 20 and he gives notice to the Chairman on April 30, the said talaq will become effective after 60 days of notice i.e. on July 29. So according to Ordinance of 1971, termination of marriage by talaq become effective 90 days after service of notice upon chariman union council.

Now coming to your query i.e. section 7(6) it says that halala is not required unless termination by talaq become effective the third time.

Termination by talaq becomes effective first time when first talaq is given and ninety days of service of notice have been passed. Woman may remarry thereafter without hala.

When second talaq is given and 90 days have been passed, talaq will become effective second time.

Thereafter when talaq is given the third time, suppose on 31 December, 2011 and notice on chairman is also served on that day, and 90 days i.e. 29th March, 2012 has been passed, then termination by talaq will become effective third time and woman shall be debarred from remarrying.

Now according to your question unless such termination (i.e. termination by talaq) for the third time [U]so effective[/U] (i.e. become effective owing to passing of 90 days after service of notice on Chairman) the couple may remarry without hala.

Under section 7(6), in above example, the woman shall not be debarred from remarrying the husband before 29 March 2012 as the talaq has not become effective third time. However, after 29 March the talaq will become effective third time and the halala will be required.

It will be pertinent to mention that provisions of section 7(3) which says that talaq is revocable and will become effective after 90 days of service of notice and section 7(5) which says that talaq will not become effective till pregnancy ends, have been declared illegal and of no effect on the ground of repugnancy to the Injunctions of Islam, by the Hon'ble Federal Shariat Court through a case titiled [I]"Ghulam Asghar v State"[/I] reported as [2000 PLD FSC 1]