CHANDER Vs. SHEELA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Regular Second Appeal directed against the judgment of the Additional District Judge affirming the decree passed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, for recovery of possession of house bearing No. 457, Rampura, Delhi.

(2.) The plaintiff, Shrimati Sheela Devi had sued for recovery of possession on the ground that she was the absolute owner of the house in question. The first defendant, Shri Chander, was the brother of the plaintiff, who claimed to be in permissive possession for the last seven or eight years. The other defendants in the Suit were the sub-tenants. The present appellant had taken the stand that the plot was purchased by the father in the name of his daughter who was nine years old at that time. The appellant was a Conductor in the Delhi Transport Corporation and the plot was to serve as a security for the marriage of the daughter, i.e., the plaintiff. The plot was purchased benami in the name of the daughter. It was claimed that the appellant had purchased the property with his own funds at the instance of the father. It was also further claimed that the appellant had expended the entire expenses on the marriage of the sister, so there was no need to sell the plot. And furthermore, the appellant had the continuous possession of the plot since the date of its purchase.

(3.) In view of the nature of the dispute, the real point in controversy turns on whether there was any benami transaction in the name of the plaintiff, and if so, what was its effect.