In Brief
The Supreme Court reversed a lower court's partition decree in a family dispute over property allegedly purchased by a husband in his wife's name from ancestral funds. The plaintiff's heirs claimed the properties were benami (held in another's name) and should be treated as ancestral joint family property. The Court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove the Sale Deeds were benami transactions by cogent evidence, and that merely paying part consideration or stamp duty does not establish benami intent. Except for two items admitted to be ancestral, the other properties were self-acquired by the wife and not divisible among the heirs. The appeal was partly allowed, reducing the plaintiffs' entitlement.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.