Back
G. JAYACHANDRAN, SUNDER MOHAN
G. Felshia Vasanthi – Appellant
Versus
R. Sekar @ Gunasekar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sunder Mohan, J.
The appeal is preferred by the wife challenging the Judgment and Decree in O.S.No.20 of 2004, by which, the learned Judge, Family Court, Chennai, declared that the suit schedule properties purchased in her name by the husband/respondent are benami properties purchased for the interest of the respondent and not for her beneficial interest.
2. The respondent filed the suit for the declaration that Item Nos.1 to 6 of the suit properties were benami properties purchased by him in the name of the appellant and that she had no beneficial interest in the suit properties.
3. The averments in the plaint filed by the respondent briefly are as follows:
The burden of proving a benami transaction rests on the party asserting the plea, and the defendants failed to discharge this burden.
The burden of proof in claiming a property as a benami lies on the person alleging it, and presumption favors the name holder unless proven otherwise.
Burden has to be strictly discharged by adducing legal evidence of a definite character which would either directly prove fact of Benami or establish circumstances, unerringly and reasonably raising ....
Benami Transactions – Property purchased by husband – Contribution of wife directly or indirectly, she has right over the property acquired by husband.
In partition suits concerning benami transactions, the burden of proving such claims lies with the defendants; failure to do so results in equal distribution of shares among legal heirs.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
