RAMA DEI Vs. MADHABANANDA PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE defendants in Title Suit No. 67 of 1983 are the petitioners in this revision. By the impugned order, the court rejected the contentions of the defendants made in an application for preliminary hearing on issue No. 11. Issue No. 11 is to the following effect : "Whether the suit is hit by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988."

(2.) THE plaintiff claims title to the suit property on the allegation that the same was purchased by him in the name of defendant No. 1, who happens to be his wife who deserted him about 10 years back. Defendant No. 1 has transferred the said property, in favour of defendant No. 2. THE plaintiff alleges that he would not be bound by the said transfer. THE defendants, in their written statement, have raised a plea that, in view of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the suit is not maintainable. In view of these pleadings, issue No. 11 as quoted above has been framed.