Impleadment of alleged real owner allowed in pre-emption suit despite Section 281A bar on benami claims.

Section 281A of the Income-tax Act does not bar impleadment of an alleged real owner in an existing pre-emption suit, because the provision restricts a claimant from instituting proceedings to enforce rights in benami property and does not control joinder in a pending action. Where the ostensible owner denies real ownership, the alleged real owner may be added as a party so the dispute can be effectively adjudicated. The trial court was therefore justified in impleading the real owner, and the revision petition was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether Section 281A of the Income-tax Act barred the impleadment of the alleged real owner as a defendant in a pre-emption suit.

Analysis: Section 281A prohibits a claimant asserting ownership of benami property from instituting a suit to enforce rights in respect of such property unless the statutory conditions are satisfied. The provision does not govern a request by the alleged real owner to be impleaded in an existing suit so that he may contest the pre-emption claim. Where the ostensible owner denies being the real owner, the proper course is to implead the person claiming to be the real owner and adjudicate the dispute effectively.

Conclusion: Section 281A was no bar to impleadment of the real owner, and the trial court was justified in adding him as a party.

Final Conclusion: The revision petition was rejected and the impleadment order was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 281A of the Income-tax Act does not prevent impleadment of an alleged real owner in an existing pre-emption suit; when the ostensible owner disclaims real ownership, the real owner may be joined so the dispute can be effectively decided.

---