https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423486 The court held that the Benami Prohibition Act is not retrospective and does not apply to pending suits. The property in question was deemed to be purchased from joint family funds, with the appellant failing to challenge this finding. As the property was purchased for the benefit of Umayal Ammal, the appellant acquired valid title. The judgment and decree of the first appellate court were set aside, directing the appellant to deposit a sum for the plaintiff. The second appeal was allowed with no costs. en-us Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423486 The court held that the Benami Prohibition Act is not retrospective and does not apply to pending suits. The property in question was deemed to be purchased from joint family funds, with the appellant failing to challenge this finding. As the property was purchased for the benefit of Umayal Ammal, the appellant acquired valid title. The judgment and decree of the first appellate court were set aside, directing the appellant to deposit a sum for the plaintiff. The second appeal was allowed with no costs. Case-Laws Benami Property Thu, 10 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423486