2022 (3) TMI 1008 - HC - Benami Property

Benami transaction - preliminary decree passed by the learned Civil Judge - Trial Judge passed a decree disregarding the amendments made in Sections 3 and 4 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 - HELD THAT - Trial Judge has failed to appreciate that the property was purchased by the father in the name of the mother and accordingly, the said property should be treated as the property of the father. On the demise of the father, the parties shall inherit the property in equal measure. It is true, that the learned Trial Judge has relied upon the unamended Sections 3 and 4 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 in arriving at a finding that the plaintiff no.1 is the co-owner of 8 anas share of the 'kha' schedule property. However, by reason of amendment, to which our attention is drawn by Mr. Prasad, the mother becomes the absolute owner of the 'kha' schedule property which was purchased in her name by her husband. Mr. Prasad submits that the property was purchased in the joint names of the plaintiff no.1 and her husband. Although, the learned Trial Judge has referred to the unamended provision but the new amended provision conclusively vested the right in favour of her towards her 8 anas claim in 'kha' schedule property. In view thereof, the order of the learned Trial Judge is upheld, however, for the reason recorded in this order. The appeal fails.

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in presenting the memorandum of appeal.
2. Interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988.
3. Ownership rights in a property purchased in the name of the mother.

Condonation of Delay:
The judgment addresses an application for condonation of delay of 20 days in presenting the memorandum of appeal. The Court, after perusing the application, finds sufficient cause for the delay and consequently condones the delay, allowing the appeal.

Interpretation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988:
The appeal arises from a preliminary decree in a partition suit where the Trial Judge's decision was based on the unamended provisions of the Act. However, the appellants argue that the property, purchased in the joint names of the mother and her husband, should be treated as the father's property, with inheritance rights for the parties. The Court acknowledges the amendments in Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, which now make the mother the absolute owner of the property purchased in her name by her husband. Despite the Trial Judge's reliance on the unamended provisions, the amended provision conclusively vests the rights in favor of the mother, upholding the Trial Judge's order based on the amended provision.

Ownership Rights in Property Purchased in Mother's Name:
The judgment affirms the Trial Judge's decision regarding the ownership rights in the property, emphasizing the amended provision that establishes the mother as the absolute owner. While the appeal fails based on the Trial Judge's order and the amended provision, no costs are awarded. The service of notice of appeal upon the respondents is waived, and the Court directs the provision of an urgent certified copy of the order upon application by the parties.