Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J
Braham Dev Sood – Appellant
Versus
Janki – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case facts and trial court findings on benami property. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. appellate court history and arguments of parties. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. applicability of benami act to suits filed after commencement. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. substance over form in benami transactions and prohibition of enforcement. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. final outcome: benami property liable to government confiscation. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the plaintiff filed a civil suit before the learned Trial Court seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction for restraining the defendants from alienating the suit land mentioned in para-1 of the plaint and interfering with his possession. It was asserted that the plaintiff’s predecessor-in-interest had purchased the suit land through a registered sale dated No.51, dated 20.10.1948, and Sale deed No. 61 dated 23.11.1949 in the name of Hira Nand as Benami. The plaintiff’s predecessor could not get the Sale deed executed in his name because the persons who were not residing at Kandaghat were barred
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
