Vest, (1) Either to place in possession; to make possessor of; or, to give an absolute interest in property when a named period or event occurs. (2) (of a right or interest) Its coming into the possession of any one; enuring to the benefit of any one.
The word 'vest' has not got a fixed connotation, meaning in all cases that the property is owned by the person or the authority in whom it vests. It may vest in title, or it may vest in possession, or it may vest in a limited sense, as indicated in the context in which it may have been used in a particular piece of legislation, Fruit and Vegetable Merchants Union v. Delhi Improvement Trust, AIR 1957 SC 344 (356): (1957) SCR 1. [U.P. Town Improvement Act (8 of 1819)]
The property must not only be owned by the Corporation, it must also be in the occupation of the Corporation itself. It is in this sense that the words 'vesting' has been used. 'Vesting' often means 'vesting' in possession, Municipal Corpora-tion of Hyderabad v. P.N. Murthy, AIR 1987 SC 802 (805): (1987) 1 SCC 568: (1987) 2 SCR 107. [Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, s. 202(1)]
The word 'vest' is normally used where an immediate fixed right in present or future enjoyment in respect of a property is created. With the long usage the said word 'vest' has also acquired a meaning as 'an absolute or indefeasible right', Howrah Municipal Corporation v. Ganges Rope. Co. Ltd., (2004) 1 SCC 663 (680).
It is well-settled that the meaning of 'vest' takes colour from the context in which it is used and it is not necessarily the same in every provision or in every context. The meaning of the word 'vest' in s. 3 has a bearing on the validity of this provision since the consequence of abatement of suits etc., M. Ismail Faruqui v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 605: 1994) 6 SCC 360 (393). [Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993, s. 3]
Means to confer ownership of property upon a person 2. To invest, a person, with full title to property, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 1557.
Generally means to give a property in, per Brett, L.J. Coverdale v. Charlton, (1878) 48 LJQB 128: 4 QBD 104: 40 LT 88 (CA).
Vest, is of fluid or flexible content and can, if the context so dictates, bear the limited sense of 'being in possession and enjoyment', Maharaj Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1976 SC 2602: (1997) 1 SCC 155.
Means having obtained an absolute and indefeasible right as contradistinguished from the not having so obtained it. The word vest has no fixed connota-tion. It may vest in title, or it may vest in possession or it may vest in a limited sense. It will depend on the context in which it is used in a particular piece of legislation, Dayawanti v. New Delhi Municipality, AIR 1982 Del 534. [See also Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, s. 193(2)]
View Judgments Citing this Phrase View Acts Citing this Phrase