Hello,Plot case at GGN, purchased in 2009, on wife's name. Funds from my side (husband)..
In Suit for Declaration, comes into play sec 3(2) and 4 of Benami Act . Both sec 3(2) and 4 are contrary to each another..
Imp is to show the court the intent to buy the property , which in this case was for my benefit.
Can I word it like this ,,, still not get into the claws of Sec 4 (3).. ??
PLANTIFF - HUSBAND ; DEFENDANT - WIFE
THE SUIT PROPERTY WAS NEVER PURSHASED BY THE PLANTIFF , FOR THE BENEFIT OF DEFENDANT ,, WHO WAS ONLY A NOMINAL OWNER,,,, WHILE THE PLANTIFF IS TRUE AND BENEFICAL OWNER OF SUIT PROPERTY
Does sec 3 & 4 are Seen together , or any section has more relevance than the other in the BENAMI Act 1988??
