https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349822 A partition claim based on the assertion that the father paid the purchase consideration was barred where the suit property stood in the defendants' names under a registered sale deed. The Delhi HC noted that such a plea falls within the prohibition on benami claims under Sections 3 and 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, and that no exception under Section 4(3) was made out. There was no pleaded or proved Hindu Undivided Family, no material showing the property was thrown into common hotchpotch after 1956, and no basis for a trust or fiduciary capacity claim. The alleged minority of the transferees did not change the position, and the partition suit was held not maintainable. en-us Fri, 13 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Dec 2019 18:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349822 A partition claim based on the assertion that the father paid the purchase consideration was barred where the suit property stood in the defendants' names under a registered sale deed. The Delhi HC noted that such a plea falls within the prohibition on benami claims under Sections 3 and 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, and that no exception under Section 4(3) was made out. There was no pleaded or proved Hindu Undivided Family, no material showing the property was thrown into common hotchpotch after 1956, and no basis for a trust or fiduciary capacity claim. The alleged minority of the transferees did not change the position, and the partition suit was held not maintainable. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 13 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349822