SRI MARCEL MARTINS versus M. PRINTER & ORS.

SRI MARCEL MARTINS versus M. PRINTER & ORS.

The appellant held ostensible title to the property in a fiduciary capacity vis-a-vis the respondents, who contributed towards the sale consideration and continued to have interest in the property. Consequently, the sale transaction is saved from the prohibition of Section 4 of the Act by reason of Section 4(3)(b), and the suit filed by respondents is not barred.

Parties
Appellant: Sri Marcel Martins; Respondents: M. Printer and ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Benami Transactions, Fiduciary Capacity, Title to Immovable Property

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sri Marcel Martins

Appellant

M. Printer and ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

  1. 1 Whether the sale transaction in favour of the appellant is a benami transaction barred by Section 4 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 or is saved by Section 4(3)(b) due to fiduciary capacity.
  2. 2 Whether respondents are entitled to declaration of co-ownership and injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant held ostensible title to the property in a fiduciary capacity vis-a-vis the respondents, who contributed towards the sale consideration and continued to have interest in the property. Consequently, the sale transaction is saved from the prohibition of Section 4 of the Act by reason of Section 4(3)(b), and the suit filed by respondents is not barred.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed without any order as to costs.