MEHTA MANGAL RAI Vs. KARAM CHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal was initially heard by D.K. Mahajan and P.C. Pandit, JJ., and by their order dated 11th April, 1963, they framed an additional issue and sent the case back to the trial Court for submitting a report after giving the parties full opportunity to lead evidence on the new issue. The issue framed by them is in the following terms:

(2.) THE report of the learned Senior Subordinate Judge dated 14th August, 1963 is to the effect that Balram Dass was the real owner of the house in dispute and the sale in his favour was not benami. It is conceded before us that if the report is upheld, then the appeal must fail and if we hold that the sale in favour of Balram Dass was benami, then further questions raised in the controversy would have to be determined. I would, therefore address myself, to start with, to the question of the benami nature of the sale of the house in dispute in favour of Balram Dass.

(3.) THE Court below has held that a sum of Rs. 130/ - was paid at the time of the allotment of the house before execution of the sale -deed and a sum of Rs. 1,924/ - was adjusted towards the price of the house from the claim standing in the name of Mangat Rai, father of Balram Dass. The sum of Rs. 130/ - was also asserted by Mangat Rai to have been paid by him, but this payment of Rs. 130/ - by Mangat Rai has been disbelieved by the Court below. The lower Court after considering the entire evidence based its final conclusion against the benami nature of the sale in favour of Balram Dass in the following words: