AIR 2001 ALLAHABAD 366 ::2001 ALL. L. J. 2894 ::2001 (2) All RentCas 368 ::2001 (44) All LR 589 ::2001 (3) All WC 2094

Allahabad High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): B. K. Rathi , J

(A) Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act (45 of 1988) , S.4— Burden of proof - Plea that person was only a benamidar and that the property was purchased by her husband in her name - No direct evidence that she had independent income or had stridhan - Money for sale proved to be withdrawn by her husband from his Provident Fund - Property purchased in her name by her husband due to apprehension of dispute by his brothers - Concurrent findings by Courts that sale deed in her favour was a benami transaction - Cannot be interfered with. The onus of proof heavily lie on the person who alleged a benami transaction to prove it. However, when the transaction is of the year 1936 no direct evidence would be expected and the conclusion would be arrived on the basis of the circumstance. Thus, where in a suit for partition, it was claimed that gift-deed under which suit house was gifted to defendant by his mother was invalid as she was only a benamidar in whose name the house was purchased by her husband, the ancestor of parties, and there was no direct evidence to show that she had any independent income or had stridhan and it was proved that the money for purchase was withdrawn from the Provident Fund account of her husband and that @page-All367 the property was purchased in her name by her husband on apprehension of dispute and claim to p....