TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (12) TMI 25
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f her own to buy the house and was only a benamidar for the plaintiff. A number of circumstances were stated to exist which showed the transaction to be benami in nature. Kamla Devi sold the house on June 11, 1973, to Smt. Prem Wati Bhandari, defendant No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) for Rs. 30,000. It was pleaded by the appellant that the plaintiff, Ved Parkash, had no locus standi to file the present suit and that the house was purchased by her after paying a consideration of Rs. 30,000 before the Sub-Registrar. A number of other pleas were also taken. The trial court, after framing the issues, decreed the suit and gave a declaration to the effect that Ved Parkash, plaintiff-respondent, is the sole owner in possession ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lly relates to past transactions as well. The expression 'any property held benami' is not limited to any particular time, date or duration. Once the property is found to have been held benami, no suit, claim or action to enforce any right in respect thereof shall lie. Similarly, sub-section (2) of section 4 nullifies the defences based on any right in respect of any property held benami whether against the person in whose name the property is held or against any other person in any suit, claim or action by or on behalf of a person claiming to be the real owner of such property. It means that once a property is found to have been held benami, the real owner is bereft of any defence against the person in whose name the property is held or an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and the Act has resulted in removal of that protection. When the law nullifies the defences available to the real owner in recovering the benami property from the benamidar, the law must apply irrespective of the time of the benami transactions. The expression 'shall lie' in section 4(1) and 'shall be allowed' in section 4(2) are prospective and shall apply to present (future stages) and future suits, claims or actions only. This leads us to the question whether there was a present suit between the plaintiff-respondent and the defendant-appellant on the date of the law coming into force. We have noted the dates of filing the suit and judgments of the courts below. On the date of section 4 of the Act coming into force, that is, May 19, 19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fe or daughter. I do not find any substance in this submission firstly because even if the property is purchased in the name of the wife or unmarried daughter, still the character of the transaction remains benami and is not taken but of the purview of section 2 (a) of the Act which defines "benami transaction" as any transaction in which property is transferred to one person for a consideration paid or provided by another person. Sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Act, no doubt, creates an exception to the effect that property can be purchased by any person in the name of his wife or unmarried daughter but this does not mean that the rigour of section 4(1) of the Act which bars the filing of a suit, claim or action to recover such a prope....