https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308890 A plaint asserting that properties and businesses were HUF or joint family assets must plead specific foundational facts showing how the HUF arose and how each asset acquired that character. Bare references to "joint funds", "joint properties" and working together are insufficient, especially after the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The pleading must include material particulars under Order VI Rule 4 CPC, such as the origin of the HUF, any blending into a common hotchpotch, and complete details of the properties and alleged basis of ownership. Without such particulars, the claim may fall within the bar under Section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, unless the statutory exception is clearly pleaded and established. en-us Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 30 Jul 2023 11:22:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308890 A plaint asserting that properties and businesses were HUF or joint family assets must plead specific foundational facts showing how the HUF arose and how each asset acquired that character. Bare references to "joint funds", "joint properties" and working together are insufficient, especially after the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The pleading must include material particulars under Order VI Rule 4 CPC, such as the origin of the HUF, any blending into a common hotchpotch, and complete details of the properties and alleged basis of ownership. Without such particulars, the claim may fall within the bar under Section 4(1) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988, unless the statutory exception is clearly pleaded and established. Case-Laws Benami Property Mon, 18 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308890