AMRUTAM VENKATAPPA Vs. VAVILALA JALAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE do not think that this is a suit against the auction purchaser on the ground that the purchase was made on behalf of the plaintiff within the meaning of Section 66, Civil Procedure Code. The finding is that the defendant agreed that the property should be purchased in the name of the defendant and that one half of it should be conveyed by the defendant to the plaintiff after the sale certificate had been obtained. This in our opinion is not a benami transaction at all. The mere fact that the plaintiff alleges in the plaint that the auction-purchaser was a benamidar for him has not in our opinion the effect of debarring the plaintiff under Section 66, Civil Procedure Code from maintaining his suit for specific performance of an agreement by the auction purchaser subsequent to the purchase to convey the property to the plaintiff. Such an agreement is not inconsistent with auction- purchaser s own title, but rather the reverse. WE answer the question in the negative.