2020 (8) TMI 879 - HC - Benami Property

Benami Transactions - Scope of 2016 amendment Benami Transactions Act, 1988 - HELD THAT - As in M/S. GANPATI DEALCOM PVT. LTD. THROUGH MANAGING DIRECTOR 2020 (3) TMI 899 - SUPREME COURT has passed an interim order, whereby, the operation of the impugned order insofar as it holds that 2016 amendment of the Benami Transactions Act, 1988 was prospective in nature, was stayed. Keeping in view the above order, it is ordered that in the meantime, operation of the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge insofar as it holds that 2016 amendment Benami Transactions Act, 1988 was prospective in nature, shall remain stayed.

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of the Benami Transactions Act, 1988

In the judgment, the High Court considered multiple appeals related to the interpretation of the Benami Transactions Act, 1988. The appellants argued that a similar matter decided by the Calcutta High Court had led the Hon'ble Supreme Court to issue an interim order staying the operation of an impugned order that held the 2016 amendment of the Act as prospective. The High Court noted the Supreme Court's order and decided to stay the operation of the impugned order in question until further hearings. The case was listed for the main hearing on a specific date.

The High Court's decision was influenced by the Supreme Court's interim order in a related matter. The issue at hand was whether the 2016 amendment to the Benami Transactions Act, 1988 should be considered prospective or retrospective. The appellants relied on the Calcutta High Court's decision and the subsequent Supreme Court order to support their argument. The High Court, in light of the Supreme Court's order, stayed the operation of the impugned order until the main case hearing scheduled for a future date. The legal interpretation of the Benami Transactions Act, 1988 was central to the appeals, and the stay order provided temporary relief pending further judicial consideration.