Live Help
Want to know more
Enter the details and we'll call you soon

Name :

Company Name :

City :

Mobile No. :

Email id :

  

Thank you for your details



Our Executive will reach you shortly.

Your Session Will Expire in   seconds.
If you do not wish to log-out, choose 'Let me continue'
Reset SessionCancel Session
 

Suit challenging transaction falling u/s 4(3)(b) isn’t barred u/s 4 of Benami Property Act: SC

April 3, 2019[2019] 104 taxmann.com 53 (SC)
237 Views

CL : Where appellant filed a suit for declaration of title with respect to premises and prayed that he be declared owner of premises and that sale deed dated 24-7-2006 executed by first defendant in favour of second defendant be cancelled and second defendant submitted an application under Order VII Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure praying for rejection of plaint on ground that suit was barred under section 4 of Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988, it was held that transaction was completely saved from mischief of section 4 by reason of same falling under sub-section (3)(b) and that Suit was not barred under Act and, therefore, application preferred by second defendant under Order VII Rule 11 CPC was to be dismissed and Trial Court was directed to expedite matter and dispose of pending Suit as early as possible

read more

taxmann.com
Payment
Best view in 1140 x 768