( 1 ) [ed. Facts. Plaintiff alleged that he and his mother and brothers were members of HUF and suit property was purchased by him and it was taken in the name of mother and was at least HUF and it could not be willed away in the name of Deft. no. 4. The defence was that suit was barrad by S. 4 of Benami Transaction (P of R to R) Act and suit should be dismissed on preliminary objection. S. 4 makes an exception in the case of HUF property and it was held that matter could not be summarily decided]. After detailing above facts, judgment proceeds ;

( 2 ) THE burden of showing that a transfer is a benami transaction lies on the person who asserts that it is such a transaction. The governing principle for determing the question whether a transaction is benami or not is to be proved by proving that the purchase money came from a person other than the person in whose favour the property is transferred. In fact the purchase is prima facie to be inferred. The intention of the person who contributed towards the money has to be inferred from the circumstances and relationship of the parties and the motive governing their action in bringing about the transaction and their subsequent