Husband Acquiring Property in Name of Wife does not Necessarily Imply Benami Transaction: Calcutta HC [Read Order]

In a recent decision the Calcutta High Court observed that the husband acquiring property in the name of wife does not necessarily imply Benami transaction.

The factual matrix of the present case is that, the respondent-mother, Lila Roy purchased the suit property from her ‘stridhan’ property and later became the absolute owner of the suit property. The conveyance deed of conveyance in her name was not challenged by her husband or the appellant-son, Sekhar Kumar Roy at that time.

The respondent bequeathed the suit property in favour of her daughter because while the appellant abandoned the respondent and subjected her to mental and physical torture, it was her daughter who provided her the financial assistance for her needs.

The appellant claimed that his father, Sailendra Kumar Roy, since deceased had purchased the suit property by a registered deed of sale in 1969 in 'benam' of his wife, Smt. Lila Roy.

Ayan Poddar, Advocate representing the appellant submitte that Lila claimed that she purchased the suit property and constructed a building thereon from her ‘stridhan’ properties but no particulars of ‘stridhan’ properties have been disclosed and Lila did not disclose wherefrom she acquired the ‘stridhan’ properties and she did not disclose the value of her ‘stridhan’ properties.

Chatterjee, Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that the suit property was purchased in 1970 and Sailendra died in 1999. Lila deposed in 2016 regarding the suit property which was purchased almost 46 years back. Hence, it is not expected that Lila would preserve all the documents and proofs relating to payment of consideration money and expenses borne for construction of building.

The Counsel further contended that Lila paid taxes to the Corporation and drawing our attention to the evidence of the parties and that Sekhar himself admitted that he did not look after her mother and that the appellant has been making desperate attempt to shift the burden upon the defendants but it is burden of the plaintiff to prove that Sailendra paid the consideration money and incurred the expenses for construction of the structure.

A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court of Justices Partha Sarathi Chatterjee and Tapabrata Chakraborty observed that “In the Indian society, if a husband supplies the consideration money for acquiring property in the name of his wife, such fact does not necessarily imply benami transaction. Source of money is, no doubt, an important factor but not a decisive one. The intention of the supplier of the consideration money is the vital fact to be proved by the party who asserts benami.”

“In India, two kinds of benami transactions are generally recognized. Where a person buys a property with his own money but in the name of another person without any intention to benefit such other person, the transaction is called benami. In that case, the transferee holds the property for the benefit of the person who has contributed the purchase money, and he is the real owner. The second case which is loosely termed as a benami transaction is a case where a person who is the owner of the property executes a conveyance in favour of another without the intention of transferring the title to the property thereunder” the Court noted.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates