Sections 84-85 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Sections 84 and 85 are two of the "obligations in the nature of trusts" in Chapter IX. Section 84 deals with an owner who transfers property to another for an illegal purpose. Section 85 deals with a bequest on trust for a purpose that is unlawful on the face of the will, or one the legatee agreed with the testator to apply unlawfully, and with a bequest whose revocation was prevented by coercion. In each case the person who received the property must hold it for the transferor or the testator's legal representative. The Act deals with private trusts; public, charitable and religious trusts are governed by other laws (see private vs public trust). If you are caught up in a dispute of this kind, our legal dispute resolution team can look at the documents.
Section 84: where the owner transfers property for an illegal purpose and (i) the purpose is not carried into execution, or (ii) the transferor is not as guilty as the transferee, or (iii) letting the transferee keep the property might defeat the provisions of any law, the transferee must hold the property for the benefit of the transferor. Section 85: where a testator bequeaths property on trust and the purpose appears on the face of the will to be unlawful, or the legatee agreed with him during his lifetime to apply it unlawfully, the legatee holds the property for the testator's legal representative; the same applies where revocation of a bequest was prevented by coercion.
Section 84: transfer for an illegal purpose
Section 84 reads: "Where the owner of property transfers it to another for an illegal purpose and such purpose is not carried into execution, or the transferor is not as guilty as the transferee, or the effect of permitting the transferee to retain the property might be to defeat the provisions of any law, the transferee must hold the property for the benefit of the transferor."
The section starts with a transfer "for an illegal purpose". Then it gives three alternatives, joined by "or", any one of which brings the rule into play.
| Alternative | The Act's words | In plain terms |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | "such purpose is not carried into execution" | The illegal plan was never carried out |
| 2 | "the transferor is not as guilty as the transferee" | The transferor is less to blame than the transferee |
| 3 | "the effect of permitting the transferee to retain the property might be to defeat the provisions of any law" | Letting the transferee keep it would undermine a legal rule |
The result: "the transferee must hold the property for the benefit of the transferor". The Act does not say what an "illegal purpose" is, so the meaning depends on other laws. It does not define "as guilty". And it does not say what happens if none of the three alternatives is satisfied; the text is silent, so no rule should be drawn from the silence.
Section 85: bequest for an illegal purpose, and bequest prevented from revocation
Section 85 has two paragraphs.
First paragraph. "Where a testator bequeaths certain property upon trust and the purpose of the trust appears on the face of the will to be unlawful, or during the testator's lifetime the legatee agrees with him to apply the property for an unlawful purpose, the legatee must hold the property for the benefit of the testator's legal representative."
There are two situations. In the first, the unlawful purpose is visible in the will itself. In the second, the will may look innocent, but the legatee has agreed with the testator during his lifetime to apply the property unlawfully. In both, the legatee holds the property for the testator's legal representative, not for the intended objects.
Bequest of which revocation is prevented by coercion. "Where property is bequeathed and the revocation of the bequest is prevented by coercion, the legatee must hold the property for the benefit of the testator's legal representative."
The word "coercion" is used but not defined in the section. The legatee here need not have done anything unlawful with the property; the point is that the testator was stopped from revoking.
The Act's illustrations
In the scanned copy consulted, no illustrations are printed under sections 84 and 85, so none are restated here.
A modern example of our own
- Section 84. Jagdish Mehra transfers a godown to his associate Pankaj so that Pankaj can use it to store goods that the law prohibits. Before anything is stored, Jagdish changes his mind. The illegal purpose "is not carried into execution", so Pankaj must hold the godown for Jagdish.
- Section 84, other limbs. If instead the scheme went ahead but Pankaj was the one who planned it and pressed Jagdish into it, the "not as guilty" alternative may apply. The text leaves the weighing of guilt to the Court.
- Section 85, first paragraph. Bindu Chauhan's will leaves Rs 30 lakh to Hari on trust for a purpose that is unlawful on the face of the will. Hari holds the money for Bindu's legal representative.
- Section 85, second paragraph. Bindu's nephew prevents her by threats from revoking a bequest of her jewellery. The legatee must hold the jewellery for Bindu's legal representative.
What the instrument of trust can change
These sections do not mention the instrument of trust, and the text does not say that a deed can override them. A transfer or bequest for an unlawful purpose is not the kind of provision a deed can turn into a valid one. The Act's section on the lawful purpose of a trust is section 4; see section 4 on lawful purpose. For the effect on the trust's survival, see section 77, which lists a purpose becoming unlawful as a ground of extinction.
Practical points
- Settlors and testators: state the purpose of a trust plainly and make sure it is lawful.
- Do not agree privately with a testator to use a bequest for something other than what the will says; section 85 makes you hold it for his legal representative.
- Legal representatives: if you suspect a bequest was tied to an unlawful purpose or that revocation was prevented, preserve the will, messages and bank records.
- For disputes, take advice early; these sections turn on evidence of purpose, guilt and coercion.
Need help with a transfer made for an unlawful purpose?
If property was transferred or bequeathed for a purpose that was or may have been unlawful, the deed, the will and the surrounding facts matter. Our legal dispute resolution team can review them and explain where sections 84 and 85 may apply.
Key takeaways
- Section 84: a transfer for an illegal purpose leaves the transferee holding the property for the transferor if the purpose is not carried out, the transferor is less guilty, or letting the transferee keep it would defeat a law.
- Section 85: a legatee holds a bequest for the testator's legal representative if the purpose is unlawful on the face of the will or agreed to be unlawful with the testator.
- The same applies where revocation of a bequest was prevented by coercion.
- The Act defines neither "illegal purpose" nor "coercion" in these sections.
- No illustrations are printed under these sections in the scanned text.
Read next
- Sections 86-87: rescindable contract transfers and debtor as creditor's representative
- Sections 80-83: obligations in the nature of trust and trust incapable of execution
- Section 4: lawful purpose of a trust
- Private trust vs public trust: key differences
Disclaimer: Based on the text of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 as consulted on 1 October 2026 from a scanned copy; the Act applies to private trusts, and public, charitable and religious trusts are governed by other laws. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text and take advice before acting.