Laxmi Chand Maravi Vs Dwarika Gupta (Appellate Tribunal Under SAFEMA Delhi)
SAFEMA Delhi held that non-tribal individual used tribal employee to Benami purchase land. Thus, the sale is violative of section 165(6) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code is absolutely barred under the law. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
Facts- The Initiating Officer had information that Shri Dwarika Gupta, S/o Shri Mangali Prasad Gupta, a non-tribal person had purchased various Tribal lands in the name of a tribal Shri Laxmi Chand Maravi at Villages-Lohrakot & Dumarpara (Total-9.7 acre or 3.958 ha) Tehsil Jaijaipur/Sakti, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh. Thereafter, on strength of information, sale deeds and bank statements were obtained from the respective revenue authorities of Government of Chhattisgarh and the banks.
The present appeals u/s 46(1) of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 (as amended) is filed by the appellants against the impugned order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, whereby the reference dated 03.01.2024 made by the Initiating Officer (BPU), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, u/s 24(5) of PBPT Act, 1988, was confirmed, qua the Provisional Attachment Order dated 28.12.2023.
Conclusion- Mere entrustment of sale consideration does not give rise to the ‘trust’ and cannot be protected by invoking Section 88 of the Indian Trusts Act. Moreover, if the fiduciary capacity is taken to mean and include all persons who trust each other or hold a position of trust, all benami transactions would come into the ambit of exception (ii) to section 2(9)(A) of the Act. Hence, the term fiduciary relationship cannot be interpreted in a manner to frustrate the very purpose of the Act. Moreover, the nature of said relation the fiduciary relationship was not notified by the Central Government and its nature is not akin to the relationship included in the statute.
