M. N. DODAMANI & ORS. vs U. S. D. WALIKAR (DEAD) BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES &ORS.

The Supreme Court interpreted Section 25(ii) of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947, clarifying that it does not exclude constructive notice and that the notice referred to must be actual notice. The Court held that the transferees had no actual or constructive notice of the original transaction's true nature, thus upholding the trial court's decision. The appeal was dismissed, affirming that the purpose of the statute was to protect bona fide transferees for value without notice.