Law: Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017

Section:

Tagline : Discussion: (1) Expression “Benami” is of Persian origin made of two words “be” and “name” meaning “no name” (2) Benami transaction means a transaction in the name of another person who holds the property as an ostensible owner (3) The duty lies on the party who raises the plea of benami transaction to prove by adducing unimpeachable evidence.

Summary:

The appeal concerns the claim by the daughters of late Nasiruddin Ansari that two properties in their mother's name were actually benami (held by their mother as ostensible owner but funded and owned by their deceased father). The High Court Division Bench overturned the single judge's decree in favor of the daughters, holding that no concrete evidence was brought forth to prove the benami nature of the properties. The crux is that to establish benami ownership, there must be proof of an agreement between the ostensible owner and the real purchaser and that the transaction was entered without the ostensible owner's involvement. The court emphasized the burden of proof lies on the party alleging benami transaction and considered factors like source of funds, possession, title documents, and conduct of parties. Since the deceased husband never disputed the ownership in his lifetime, and the mother proved purchase from her own resources, the properties were not declared benami. The appeal was dismissed.

Core Points:

• Benami transaction means property held by one person (ostensible owner) but funded and beneficially owned by another (real owner).
• Burden of proof lies on the party alleging benami ownership.
• Property held in the name of spouse or children is presumed genuine unless disproven by evidence.
• Mere assertion without cogent evidence is insufficient to declare property benami.
• The deceased husband's non-claim during his lifetime is significant in such disputes.
• The court gave weight to concrete evidence rather than mere suspicion.

Law and Sections: