Full Text
RASIiEED AHMED , Petitioner 'i^hrough Mr. Rajat Aneja, Advocate with
Ms. Chandrika Gupta.
Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey.
Mr. Manish Mohan, CGSC with Ms. Manisha Saroha, Advocate.
Mr N. Pandey, Advocate for R-2.
03.01.2018
ORDER
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 07.12.2009 (hereafter 'the impugned order') passed by the Cuslodian of enemy property for India (hereafter 'the Custodian') under Section 5 of the Enemy Propert>' Act, 1968 (hereafter 'the Act'). By virtue ofthe said order, the Custodian has held that the property bearing no. 2182, Ahata Kaley Sahab, Qasim Jan Street, Ballimaran, I^elhi -110006 (hereafter 'the property') vested vvith the Custodian as it t/elonged to Haji Rehman Elahi, who was a Pakistani National., 2018:DHC:8612
2. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the property. The petitioner claims to have acquired the property from one Sohail Yusuf on 08.01.2000 by way of a registered Purchase Deed. It is further claimed that the said property was mutated in the name ofthe petitioner on 29.06.2007.
3. It is claimed that the property was owned by Haji Rehman Ilahi and Haji Rehmat Ilahi, who were brothers and had equal share in the said property. It is claimed that Haji Rehmat Ilahi had bequeathed his share in the property to his daughter Mst. Sahid Bano, who in turn had gifted her share in the property to Sohail Yusuf. It is ftirther claimed that the Will of Haji Rehmat Ilahi was subject matter of disputes in suit no. 1325/1983, which was subsequently referred to arbitration. The arbitrator, Zafar Ali Multani, had delivered an arbitral award dated 20.10.1984 upholding the bequest in favour of Sahid Bano as well as the gift in favour of Sohail Yusuf
4. It is stated that Haji Rehman Elahi, bequeathed his share of the property to his grandson Abdul Rehman. Abdul Rehman in turn had gifted half share of the said property to Sohail Yusuf Thus, Sohail Yusuf became the absolute owner of the property having acquired both the shares of Haji Rehmat Ilahi as well as Haji Rehman Ilahi.
5. By the impugned order, the Custodian held that Haji Rehman Ilahi was a Pakistani national at the time of his demise and his properties vested with the Custodian by virtue ofthe Act. He, accordingly, held that half share of the property (which belonged to Haji Rehman Ilahi) vested with the Custodian. A I hi
6. The impugned order was subject matter ofchallenge beforethis Court \ in W.P.(C) 137 of 2010 captioned Tasleem Mirza v. Union ofIndia and Ors. The said petition was disposed of by an order dated 01.02.2010, whereby it was directed that the order dated 07.12.2009 be treated as withdrawn.
7. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 07.12.2009 does not survive and thus no further orders are required to be passed in this petition. The pending application is disposed of.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J JANUARY 03,2018 pkv