9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the property purchased by Battu Mal was intended to be jointly owned with the plaintiff or was a Benami transaction. 2. Whether the High Court was justified in reappreciating the evidence and reversing the findings of the Lower Appellate Court. Summary: 1. Property Ownership and Benami Transaction: The respondent (plaintiff) filed Original Suit No. 43 of 1962 for partitioning his half share in the property and for rendition of accounts. The plaintiff claimed that Battu Mal purchased the property in joint names, intending half of it for the plaintiff. The defendant (deceased appellant) argued that Battu Mal purchased the property exclusively for himself, with no intention to share or gift half to the plaintiff. The Trial Court found the entire sale consideration came from Battu Mal and declared the transaction as Benami, placing the burden on the plaintiff to prove otherwise. The Lower Appellate Court agreed, noting the plaintiff's evidence was insufficient to rebut the presumption of a Benami transaction. 2. High Court's Reappreciation of Evidence: The High Court, in Second Appeal, reappreciated the evidence and concluded that Battu Mal intended to make the plaintiff a joint owner, rejecting the Benami transaction claim. The High Court distinguished previous Privy Council and Supreme Court rulings, suggesting that societal changes rendered old presumptions inapplicable. However, the Supreme Court found that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction u/s 100, C.P.C., by reappreciating evidence without finding the Lower Appellate Court's conclusions perverse or unsupported by evidence. Conclusion: The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restoring the Lower Appellate Court's decision, which found the property purchase to be a Benami transaction with no intention by Battu Mal to benefit the plaintiff. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.
|
