TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1006
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsel for the parties and perused the material made available on record. 3. Learned Sr. counsel for the petitioners Shri V.K.Bhardwaj, submits that on bare perusal of the plaint, undisputedly, the suit property was purchased by mother of the plaintiff who sold the same by registered sale deed to the petitioners. Thus, the suit property is to be taken as self acquired property of the mother of the plaintiff and alienation of the same cannot be challenged by anyone including her son. The suit property though falsely shown to be the joint family property, but alienation of joint family property also cannot be challenged by members of joint family except if the same has been sold for some unethical or illegitimate purposes only to deprive the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wo Crore of rupees. 8. The grounds raised in the application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC are well established on bare perusal of the plaint itself, but the learned trial court has dismissed the application in arbitrary manner. The petition deserves to be allowed. He has placed reliance upon the judgments rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Leelavathi (D) by Lrs. Vs. Shankarnarayana Rao (D) by Lrs, reported in 2019 SAR (Civil) 672 and by this court in Anand Kumar Vs. Vijay Kumar and Others reported in 2012 (3) MPLJ 129, Mohd. Shakeel Vs. Husna Bano and others reported in 2017 (2) MPLJ 167 and in Anita Jain Vs. Dilip Kumar and Another reported in 2018 (1) MPLJ 554. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e whether under Order 7 Rule 11 or under Order 14 Rule 2 of Code of Civil Procedure if the same can be decided without taking evidence of the parties. However, the mixed issues of law and facts cannot be decided preliminarily and in that situation, the court has to decide all the issues after the evidence is adduced by the parties. 13. Indisputedly, present suit has been filed claiming the suit property as Joint Hindu Family Property and as per the legal position expounded in the judgment cited on behalf of the respondent/plaintiff, the bar of Section 4 of Benami Transaction Act 1988 is not attracted in case of joint family property. The judgments cited on behalf of the petitioners are not related to the joint family property, therefore, t....