https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395037 The amended Benami prohibition did not apply retrospectively to a suit filed before the amendment, so the unamended Section 4, including the statutory exception in Section 4(3), governed the dispute. A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC unless the bar is apparent from the plaint itself; where the pleadings assert that the property was acquired for the family and that the holder acted in a fiduciary or representative capacity, the Benami objection raises disputed facts requiring evidence. The plaint was therefore not liable to threshold rejection and the suit had to proceed to trial. en-us Fri, 01 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2020 12:42:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395037 The amended Benami prohibition did not apply retrospectively to a suit filed before the amendment, so the unamended Section 4, including the statutory exception in Section 4(3), governed the dispute. A plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC unless the bar is apparent from the plaint itself; where the pleadings assert that the property was acquired for the family and that the holder acted in a fiduciary or representative capacity, the Benami objection raises disputed facts requiring evidence. The plaint was therefore not liable to threshold rejection and the suit had to proceed to trial. Case-Laws Benami Property Fri, 01 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395037