https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398635 A property transaction was treated as benami on evidence showing that the purchase price was paid by the plaintiffs' father and the property stood in the name of the first defendant's husband. The court further stated that Section 4(2) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 did not bar the suit because it had been filed before the Act came into force. It also reiterated that concurrent findings of fact based on pleadings, oral evidence and documents will not be disturbed in second appeal unless there is perversity, non-consideration of material evidence or another substantial legal error. en-us Tue, 02 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Sep 2020 11:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398635 A property transaction was treated as benami on evidence showing that the purchase price was paid by the plaintiffs' father and the property stood in the name of the first defendant's husband. The court further stated that Section 4(2) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 did not bar the suit because it had been filed before the Act came into force. It also reiterated that concurrent findings of fact based on pleadings, oral evidence and documents will not be disturbed in second appeal unless there is perversity, non-consideration of material evidence or another substantial legal error. Case-Laws Benami Property Tue, 02 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398635