Ownership and/or title rights of property cannot be decided in DV case. Only stay can be granted against dispossession during the pendency of the DV case. Presuming that DV case will go in your favour and it will be dismissed, then also she can claim the half of ownership of the property in separate suit or invoking the family Act provisions, the latter being cheaper and expeditious. Prima facie, the the title indicates that both have equal shares. The evidence which you bring in the case showing that the earnest money and instalments have gone from your coffers by way of bank cheques/drafts, may tilt the balance in your favour. But that is not sufficient. If the wife was/is a working woman and she also had her monthly income and if provides evidence to show that she had been regularly paying the cash / cheque to you and after accepting that amount, you have been drawing cheques in favour of builder, then she can invoke her claim to her share. In addition to this, if she succeeds to show that even the matrimonial home has been run through her income, while you are paying the monthly instalments to the builder, then also she has got the case. In addition to this, if she succeeds to show that she brought her stridhan and/or dowry and it has been invested in the property, first by giving it to you and you put them in your bank account and later on drawn on the builder, then also she has got case. In a nutshell, by just showing that you had drawn cheques on the builder is not enough to prove that half of your property is benami transaction in your wife's favour. What you have to show is that during that period, you have not drawn or taken any amount from your wife or inlaws and also you discharged the responsibility of running your matrimonial home. If your wife is not a working woman, then also one more ground is available to her to ascertain her half right in the property being a housemaker. So, every thing depends that how evidence will be led in a separate suit.