Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.24 seconds)The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988
Section 2 in The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in The Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Union Of India vs M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. Tthrough ... on 23 August, 2022
37. It is noteworthy that Section 2 of the unamended Benami Act
which only contained the provision regarding the consideration of the
property having been provided or paid by other person in order to
CS(OS) 535/2017 Page 15 of 20
Neutral Citation: 2023/DHC/000489
bring a transaction within the scope of benami transaction, has been
held to be overly broad and disproportionately harsh by Supreme
Court. Thus, in the case of Union of India & Another Vs. Ganpati
Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.4, Supreme Court held as follows:
Section 16 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
S.M. Asif vs Virendra Kumar Bajaj on 12 August, 2015
25. Commenting on the nature of the power of a Court under Order
12 Rule 6 CPC, Supreme Court in the case of SM Asif Vs Virender
Kumar Bajaj1, has held as follows:-
Thakur Bhim Singh (Dead) By Lrs And Anr. vs Thakur Kan Singh on 21 December, 1979
In Bhim Singh [Bhim Singh v. Kan Singh, (1980) 3
SCC 72] this Court in para 18 observed and held as under :