THANJAI P.N.CHEZHIAN Vs. T.SRINIVASAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant, aggrieved by the order of the trial Court, rejecting the plaint, allowing the application filed by the defendants on the ground that the suit is barred by the provisions of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (herein after called as Act).

(2.) I have heard Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan, learned counsel for the respondent 1 to 4. There is no appearance on the side of the respondents 5 to 8.

(3.) Mr.G.Vasudevan, learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the plaintiff and the 1st defendant are husband and wife and during the happier times, the plaintiff had purchased the suit property in favour of his wife and father-in-law. It is the case of the plaintiff that the entire sale consideration was met only by the plaintiff and there was no intention to benefit his wife and further, the plaintiff is entitled to establish that it was a benami purchase. The suit has been filed on the strength of these averments to declare that the plaintiff is the sole and absolute owner of the suit properties and for various other reliefs. Pending the suit, the property had been sold and the purchasers, defendants 2, 4 to 6 have taken out I.A.No.3 of 2019, seeking rejection of the plaint on the ground that the suit is barred by the provisions of the Act.