The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that the property purchased by a Hindu man in the name of his spouse, who is a homemaker and does not have an independent source of income, will be the family’s property.
The bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said: “…because in common course of natural events, Hindu husband purchases a property in the name of his wife, who is a homemaker and does not have any source of income for the benefit of the family.”
The ruling came in an appeal filed by a man seeking his share in a property purchased by his father. He said since the property had been purchased by his father in his mother’s name, it was a joint family property. He added that he had constructed a structure on the plot from where the entire family had been operating a business.
His counsel argued before the high court that since the mother was a homemaker, the property purchased in her name should be a joint family property and not individual. The counsel referred to the judgment in a 2001 case, where it was held that “if Hindu husband purchases a property in the name of his wife, who is a homemaker, then it is to be presumed that it is a benami transaction unless otherwise shown to be purchased by the wife from her source of income”.
The counsel for the respondent family members, which included his mother and brothers, referred to a 1974 case, where the HC had observed that “there is no presumption that a Hindu joint family owns the joint properties unless it is established that it had sufficient nucleus to acquire that property”.
The counsel also referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in a 2020 case, where it was held that unless the material is produced to show that payment was made to purchase the property out of the fund of Hindu undivided family (HUF), the property cannot belong to the same.
The single judge bench, however, held the injunction plea maintainable and observed, as per the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, that if the husband purchases the property in the name of his wife or children, the same will not be said to be benami property but will be deemed to be purchased by the husband out of his source.
Further, it held that “the high court under Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act may presume the existence of fact that the property purchased by Hindu husband in the name of his spouse, who is homemaker and does not have independent source of income, will be the property of family”.
Holding that the property in question was a joint Hindu family property, the court said protection of property from transferring to a third party was necessary. Accordingly, it set aside the order of the lower court and allowed the injunction application filed by the son.
Stressing that the dispute was between the blood brothers and still pending, the HC directed the lower court to expedite its decision in the matter.
Comments
0 comment