This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the fair and final order dated 16.02.2017 made in I.A.No.241 of 2015 in O.S.No.02 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Coonoor.

2. The petitioner is the second defendant, first respondent is the plaintiff and the second respondent is the first defendant in the suit in O.S.No.02 of 2015 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Coonoor. The first respondent/plaintiff filed the above suit for declaration to declare that the sale deed executed by the second respondent/first defendant in favour of the petitioner/second defendant dated 15.07.2013 as null and void.

3. According to the first respondent, he purchased the suit property in the year 2000 in the name of his wife/2nd respondent herein, out of love and affection and for the benefit of wife & children. The property was purchased to construct a residential house, after obtaining loan from a Nationalised Bank. However, in the year 2002, due to some misunderstanding, the second respondent left the matrimonial home and took away the original sale deed in respect of the suit property. The first respondent, coming to know of intending sale by the second respondent, in favour of the petitioner, issued legal 10.07.2013 to the petitioner. The petitioner having received the notice, did not send any reply. Knowing full well that the second respondent herein has no title over the property, the petitioner herein purchased the same by deed of sale dated 15.07.2013 and hence the same is invalid and null & void.

4. In the above said circumstances, the first respondent herein filed a suit for the above stated relief. The petitioner herein filed written statement in the month of July 2015 contesting the suit. The petitioner also filed I.A.No.241 of 2015 under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC to reject the plaint in the suit. According to the petitioner, the first respondent herein has admitted that he had purchased the property in the name of his wife/second respondent herein, out of love and affection and for the benefit of his wife & children and hence the suit is barred by the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 and no cause of action for the suit has arisen. Further, the suit is abuse of process of court.

5. The first respondent filed counter and denied all the averments made in the affidavit and submitted that the purchase of property in the name of his wife/second respondent herein is not hit by provisions of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. It is further contended that the suit property purchased by the first respondent herein is not only for the benefit of his wife/second respondent but also for the benefit of his children. The property was purchased for the specific purpose of construction a residential house after obtaining loan from a Nationalised Bank. Even before the purchase of the suit property by the petitioner by way of sale deed dated 15.07.2013, the first respondent issued legal notice to the petitioner but having received the said notice, she had not sent any reply. Only the second respondent can take the stand that the suit is barred by Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 and the petitioner is not entitled to raise such plea.

6. The learned Trial Judge, after considering the averments made in the affidavit and counter affidavit, materials available on record, Sections 3(2) and 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act 1988, dismissed the application, holding that whether the purchase of the suit property by the first respondent in favour of the second respondent is hit by the provisions of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 or not is a question to be decided only after detailed trial. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present Civil Revision Petition.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first respondent, in the plaint itself has admitted that he purchased the suit property in the name of the wife/