HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This appeal has been placed before us on a reference made by R. Bhaskaran, J. since an interesting question of law on the scope and ambit of S.4(2) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') has come up for consideration.
(2.) The question that is posed for consideration is whether S.4(2) of the Act would debar a defendant in a suit for injunction from disputing the possession of the plaintiff. Learned Judge of this Court, Manoharan, J., at an interlocutory stage in C.R.P. No.2179 of 1993 arising out of the present suit held that as per S.4(2) of the Act first defendant is not entitled to rely on the said Section to support his case that he is in possession of the property.
(3.) Before we deal with the question raised in this case, we will refer to certain facts. Plaint schedule property measuring 1 acre and 46 cents of land comprised in survey number 614/4A was purchased by the plaintiff as per document No.1378/85 dated 22.4.1985 and accordingly he is in possession and enjoyment of the property. Defendants 1 to 3 are the brothers of the plaintiff's father. Fourth defendant is the grandmother of the plaintiff. There were disputes between the plaintiff and defendants regarding family properties. Defendants caused obstruction in carrying out agricultural operation in the plaint schedule property. Hence suit was instituted for injunction.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.