 "The Centre declared Pataudi family's historical property in Bhopal as 'enemy property'. Actor Saif Ali Khan was directed to approach appellate authority against the government's order. PTI")
Bollywood actor Saif Ali Khan is in the spotlight these days. After an intruder attacked him with a knife at his home in Mumbai, reports have come to light that the actor could lose family property worth Rs 15,000 crore.
The Central government had declared the historical properties of the Pataudi family as “enemy property”, which could bring them under its control. Now, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has lifted a stay on these properties imposed in 2015 that could result in their acquisition under the Enemy Property Act, 1968.
What is this act and what’s the case? We will explain.
What is Enemy Property Act, 1968?
The Enemy Property Act, 1968, empowers the government to claim properties owned by those who migrated to Pakistan after Partition .
Following the India-Pakistan wars of 1965 and 1971, people migrated from India to Pakistan.
The Defence of India Act, 1962, defines rules that state that the Indian government can take over properties and companies of individuals who took Pakistani nationality.
The Central government vested these “enemy properties” in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. This was also done with the properties left by those who migrated to China after the 1962 Sino-Indian war, as per the Indian Express report.
The Enemy Property Act, 1968, was amended in 2017 to expand the definition of “enemy subject” to include the enemy’s legal heir and successor “whether or not a citizen of India or the citizen of a country which is not an enemy or the enemy, enemy subject or his legal heir and successor who has changed his nationality.”
The definition of an enemy firm included its “succeeding firm whether or not partners or members of such succeeding firm are citizen of India or the citizen of a country which is not an enemy or such firm which has changed its nationality.”
The amended law stipulates that enemy property shall continue to vest in the Custodian even if the enemy or enemy subject or enemy firm stops to be an “enemy due to death, extinction, winding up of business or change of nationality or that the legal heir and successor is a citizen of India or the citizen of a country which is not an enemy.”
As per the Custodian, India has 13,252 enemy properties, valued at over Rs1 lakh crore.
Why is Pataudi family’s property ‘enemey property’?
Bhopal was a princely state at the time of India’s independence in 1947 and its last Nawab was Hamidullah Khan. He had three daughters. His eldest, Abida Sultan, migrated to Pakistan in 1950.
The second daughter, Sajida Sultan, remained in India, married Nawab Iftikhar Ali Khan Pataudi, and became the legal heir. Saif Ali Khan , the grandson of Sajida, inherited a share of the properties.
In 2014, the Custodian of Enemy Property Department declared the Pataudi family’s properties in Bhopal as “enemy property”.
Abida Sultan’s migration to Pakistan was the government’s basis for claiming the properties as “enemy property.”
The dispute over the Pataudi family property was fuelled further after a 2016 ordinance by the Indian government stated that heirs would not have any right over the property. Important properties such as the Flag Staff House, where Saif spent his childhood, Noor-Us-Sabah Palace, Bungalow of Habibi, Ahmedabad Palace, Dar-Us-Salam and Kohefiza Property are under the scanner.
The Pataudi family moved the MP High Court in 2015 against the Custodian’s notice declaring the Pataudi family’s properties as “enemy property”. The HC put a stay on the property at the time.
In 2019, the court recognised Sajida Sultan as the legal heir. However, last month, the High Court dismissed Saif’s petition and lifted the stay.
As per Indian Express, during a hearing on December 13, Deputy Solicitor General Pushpendra Yadav told the court that an “appellate authority has been constituted for adjudication of disputes in regard to enemy property.”
While announcing the order, Justice Vivek Agarwal said the amended Enemy Property Act, 2017 provides a statutory remedy and the parties concerned could file a representation within 30 days.
“It is directed that if representation is filed within 30 days from today (December 13), then the appellate authority shall not advert to the aspect of limitation and shall deal with the appeal on its own merits,” the court said.
Saif was to approach the tribunal by January 12, as per the court order. However, it is unclear whether he did or not.
With inputs from agencies