Home Case Index All Cases Benami Property Benami Property + HC Benami Property - 2020 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (9) TMI 754 - HC - Benami PropertyBenami transaction - Prohibition of the right to recover property held benami - fifth defendant raised plea that in view of the introduction of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, the entire transaction is hit under Section 4(2) of the said Act - whether the first plaintiff is entitled to raise plea in view of the introduction of Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 ? - HELD THAT:- In the case on hand, even before the said Act, the suit was filed and therefore the suit is very much maintainable and Section 4 (2) of the said Act is not applicable to the case on hand. Further, in case of G.Mahalingappa Vs. G.M.Savitha [2005 (8) TMI 688 - SUPREME COURT] held that it is not permissible to the High Court in the second appeal to come to contrary findings of its own only on the basis of arguments of learned counsel without considering the findings of the trial court as well as the first appellate court. The High Court in the second appeal is not entitled to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below until and unless it is found that the concurrent findings of fact are perverse and not based on the sound reasoning. This Court does not find that the concurrent findings of the fact arrived at by the courts below are either perverse or without any reason or based on the non consideration of important piece of evidence or admission of some of the parties. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there is absolutely no warrants to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the courts below, which rendered on consideration of pleadings as well as the oral and documentary evidence on record. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that no substantial questions of law are involved in the second appeal. Be that as it may, all the substantial questions of law formulated by this Court in this Second Appeal, are answered in favour of the plaintiffs and as against the defendants.
|