Legal owner of property

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 12 October 2011 This query is : Resolved
Dear Members-Team Experts

The Respondent has 2 different properties. One of the property is in the name of the Respondent's father and the second property in his individual name.
The Respondent's father died intestate There fore the first property is being claimed by the Respondent's sisters and brother's wife and a suit has being filed in the court.

The second property was purchased in 1970 in his name and is the absolute owner till date. The age of the respondent at the time of purchase was 21.

The claim of the petitioner is the second property was also purchased through the funds of HUF ( the father of Respondent ) and therefore the sisters and brother;s wife are eligible to get a share from the second property.

I solicit your opinion on the above case.

Thanks and regards

Follow Query

Report Abuse

ajay sethi (Expert) 12 October 2011
your query is in respect of second property . the fact that property was purchased when respondent was only 21 and not earning would imply that said property had been purcahsed trhough funds given by HUF or any other source .

the respeondent would have to show that he had sufficent funds in his bank account to purchase second property .

similarly the plaintiffs will have to prove that funds were given from HUF account for purchase of said property inorder to make out a case for share in said property

Querist : Anonymous (Querist) 12 October 2011
Dear Expert,

The respondent has filed his income tax and the second property was purchased through the funds from his business and partly through private finance.

It is fact that the income tax return was filed in 1970 onwards , but we are not able to get a copy of the IT return. I am not sure if the IT dept will have a original return. Please advise me

thanks for your quick response

Advocate M.Bhadra (Expert) 13 October 2011
The matter is involved and question on your second property that the plaintiff has filed a suit.Since your age was 21 years when the property purchased and your source of income provided for purchased of property,but the "Law of Benami Property" was abolished in 1988, so you have to prove about your income.

Raj Kumar Makkad (Expert) 13 October 2011
As the income tax returns of respondent no. 2 show that he purchased the property exclusively in his name out of his income derived from business as well as through loans so no other person can claim any share therein. The petitioners have no fit case in their favour.

M.Sheik Mohammed Ali (Expert) 13 October 2011
yes, i do agree experts query reply

Biswanath Roy (Expert) 13 October 2011
This case is bifurcated into two parts
1. The income tax return filed by the respondent's father at the time of purchasing 2 nd property is to be looked into and to be considered. If it is found that respondent's father as the head of H.U.F appropriated money from H.U.F fund respondents brother's wife and sister also can claim their share. 2. The burden of proving the fact lies upon brother's wife and sister.

prabhakar singh (Expert) 13 October 2011
As your query is in respect of second property which you claim BENAMI [ostensible]
in his name hence the initial burden is on you to prove the same independent of his latches{how ever BENAMI abolition law will not come in your way to prove so};on your having discharged the burden to prove it his self acquisition shall shift on him.

So all in all one who will have more probable evidence based on circumstances of the case can expect a favorable verdict.

ajay sethi (Expert) 13 October 2011
was the payment made by cheque by 2nd respondent? does he have copy of bank pass book of that period?

if as per 2nd respeondent income tax returns it is shown that it was purchased exclusively from his own funds then plaintiff case falls flat.you will have to produce your income tax returns of said period

Legal owner of property

Similar Resolved Queries :