https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393787 Section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 was treated as prospective and could not bar a suit already filed and entertained before the provision came into force. On that basis, the finding that the benami declaration suit was not maintainable was set aside. The Court also held that limitation under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from the first clear infringement or threat to the plaintiff's asserted right; as the cause of action arose when mutation was attempted in 1970, the declaratory suit filed thereafter was within time. The appellate dismissal was reversed and the trial court's decree was restored. en-us Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:19:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393787 Section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 was treated as prospective and could not bar a suit already filed and entertained before the provision came into force. On that basis, the finding that the benami declaration suit was not maintainable was set aside. The Court also held that limitation under Article 58 of the Limitation Act, 1963 runs from the first clear infringement or threat to the plaintiff's asserted right; as the cause of action arose when mutation was attempted in 1970, the declaratory suit filed thereafter was within time. The appellate dismissal was reversed and the trial court's decree was restored. Case-Laws Benami Property Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393787