NDLI: M/s Fair Communication and Consultants & Anr. Vs. Surendra Kerdile

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act 1988
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Benami Transactions (prohibition) Act, 1988 (45 of 1988)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Dismissed
Headnote	.Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988 – ss. 3, 4 – Respondent constituted his nephew-second appellant (sole proprietor of first appellant) as his attorney for disposing of his flat – An agreement to sell was entered on 03.07.89 wherein consideration for the flat was Rs. 2,30,000/- – However, a second agreement entered on 30.11.89 showed lesser consideration of Rs.1,30,000/- – Further, second appellant wanted Rs. 80,000/- for the expansion of his business – Given by the respondent – Second appellant issued post-dated cheques which were returned by the banker to the respondent – Respondent filed suit for recovery of Rs.80,000/- – Second appellant alleged that he returned the amount immediately but the respondent did not return the cheques – Suit dismissed – During the appeal filed by the respondent, applications for amending the plaint were also filed – High Court decreed the suit – On appeal, held: Consideration for the flat in terms of the agreement dtd. 03.07.89 was Rs. 2,30,000/- – This was admitted by second appellant in his deposition – It is also undisputed that the original agreement with the purchaser (who ultimately finalized the transaction) is dtd. 03.07.89 – Respondent had put the matter, during cross examination, to the appellant who admitted the document, despite the fact that it was a photocopy – Respondent argued that the original of that document was with the purchaser – This was not denied – Once these were admitted, the respondent could not be faulted for seeking consequential amendment, purely formal, to back his argument that there was sufficient money, after lending Rs. 80,000/- to the appellant, which was deposited in his account – Further, the argument that the respondent’s plea regarding the real consideration being barred based on a prohibited transaction outlawed by the Benami Act, has no merit – Respondent did not claim return of any amount from the buyer; the suit was not based on any plea involving examination of a benami transaction – Onus of establishing that a transaction is benami is upon one who asserts it – Appellants did not prove that the transaction (to which they were not parties) was benami – Their argument was merely that the transaction could not be said to be in excess of Rs. 1,30,000/-: in the context of a defense in a suit for money decree – Findings in the impugned judgment are justified.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 57
Petitioner	M/s Fair Communication And Consultants & Anr.
Respondent	Surendra Kerdile
SCR	[2020] 1 S.C.R. 441
Judgement Date	2020-01-20
Case Number	106

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

M/s Fair Communication and Consultants & Anr. Vs. Surendra Kerdile

Please Log-in to view this content

Sri Marcel Martins Vs. M. Printer & Ors.

Smt. Rebti Devi Vs. Ram Dutt and Anr. Etc.

Union of India & Anr. Vs. M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.

Samittri Devi and Anr. Vs. Sampuran Singh and Anr.

Nand Kishore Mehra Vs. Sushila Mehra

G. Mahalingappa Vs. G.m. Savitha

Padmini Chandrasekharan (since Deceased) Through Lrs. Vs. R. Rajagopal Reddy (since Deceased) Through Lrs. and Ors.

P V. Sanakara Kurup Vs. Leelavathy Nambiar

The Uttarakhand Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act

M/s Fair Communication and Consultants & Anr. Vs. Surendra Kerdile

M/s Fair Communication and Consultants & Anr. Vs. Surendra Kerdile

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Sri Marcel Martins Vs. M. Printer & Ors.

Smt. Rebti Devi Vs. Ram Dutt and Anr. Etc.

Union of India & Anr. Vs. M/s. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd.

Samittri Devi and Anr. Vs. Sampuran Singh and Anr.

Nand Kishore Mehra Vs. Sushila Mehra

G. Mahalingappa Vs. G.m. Savitha

Padmini Chandrasekharan (since Deceased) Through Lrs. Vs. R. Rajagopal Reddy (since Deceased) Through Lrs. and Ors.

P V. Sanakara Kurup Vs. Leelavathy Nambiar

The Uttarakhand Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act

M/s Fair Communication and Consultants & Anr. Vs. Surendra Kerdile