Code

CPC [Suit against purchaser not maintainable on ground of purchase being on behalf of plaintiff.]–Rep. by Act, 1988
(45of1988) ,s. 7 (w.e.f.19-5-1988).

Got it 👍 — you’re referring to Section 66 CPC, which was repealed in 1988. Let me structure it for clarity:

---

Section 66 CPC – Suit Against Purchaser Not Maintainable (Repealed)

---

Code (Before Repeal)

66. [Suit against purchaser not maintainable on ground of purchase being on behalf of plaintiff.]
— Repealed by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1988 (Act 45 of 1988), Section 7 (w.e.f. 19-5-1988).

---

Explanation (Before Repeal)

Earlier, this section prevented a plaintiff (judgment-debtor or claimant) from filing a suit alleging that the auction purchaser had actually purchased the property on his behalf (i.e., a benami purchase).

• Object:
  To stop benami claims in court sales and ensure certainty of ownership for the purchaser.
• Effect of Repeal (1988):
  After the repeal, the matter is now governed by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988.
  • This Act prohibits benami transactions altogether.
  • Thus, a judgment-debtor cannot allege that the purchaser bought the property for him as a benamidar.

---

Judicial Background (Before Repeal)

• Courts had consistently held that the section was intended to give finality to auction sales and protect bona fide purchasers from collusive or belated claims.
• Once repealed, the principle merged with the statutory prohibition on benami transactions.

---

Key Point After Repeal

• Now, no suit is maintainable on the ground that the auction purchaser purchased property on behalf of the plaintiff — not because of Section 66 CPC, but because of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988.