https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158156 The High Court upheld the dismissal of an eviction petition and suit for declaration, ruling in favor of respondent no.4's ownership claim over the property. The court clarified that the Benami Transactions Act is not retrospective, allowing the suit to proceed. Findings revealed the appellant's failure to substantiate ownership claims, leading to adverse inferences. Concerns over delay tactics in litigation prompted the imposition of Rs.25,000 in exemplary costs on the appellant, emphasizing the importance of respecting court orders and deterring fraudulent practices. en-us Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Dec 2019 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158156 The High Court upheld the dismissal of an eviction petition and suit for declaration, ruling in favor of respondent no.4's ownership claim over the property. The court clarified that the Benami Transactions Act is not retrospective, allowing the suit to proceed. Findings revealed the appellant's failure to substantiate ownership claims, leading to adverse inferences. Concerns over delay tactics in litigation prompted the imposition of Rs.25,000 in exemplary costs on the appellant, emphasizing the importance of respecting court orders and deterring fraudulent practices. Case-Laws Benami Property Thu, 11 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158156