https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290343 A statutory plea under Section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1954 could not be raised without a foundation in the written statement or a framed issue, so the consolidation bar was unavailable. Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, however, prohibited both the suit and the pending appeal because an appeal is a continuation of the suit and the statutory bar extends to pending proceedings. The pending special leave stage did not prevent the prohibition from operating once the matter was heard as an appeal. The plaintiff's benami-based claim could not be sustained and the decree in its favour could not survive. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jan 2022 16:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290343 A statutory plea under Section 49 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1954 could not be raised without a foundation in the written statement or a framed issue, so the consolidation bar was unavailable. Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, however, prohibited both the suit and the pending appeal because an appeal is a continuation of the suit and the statutory bar extends to pending proceedings. The pending special leave stage did not prevent the prohibition from operating once the matter was heard as an appeal. The plaintiff's benami-based claim could not be sustained and the decree in its favour could not survive. Case-Laws Benami Property Thu, 09 Jan 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290343