The burden of proof lies on individuals affected by forfeiture proceedings under SAFEMA to establish legitimate sources of income for property acquisition.

ORDER :

1. These petitions have been filed to calling for the records of the first respondent passed in F.P.A.Nos.48 & 49/MDS/95 dated 29.11.1999 and quash the same. The unsuccessful appellants before the Tribunal have preferred these writ petitions before this Court. Since the issues involved for the present writ petitions are one and the same and hence both the writ petitions were heard together and disposed of by this common order. Pending writ petitions, the petitioner died and her legal heirs were substituted as parties.

2. The case of the petitioners is as follows:

The deceased first petitioner's husband late Sri.R.Yusuf Khan was arrested and detained under the provisions of maintenance of Internal Security Act and thereafter the first petitioner's husband was arrested under the provisions of Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities by an order dated 05.02.1976. The competent authority issued a notice dated 21.01.1978 under Section 6(1) of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred as SAFEMA). Calling her husband to show cause why the following items of property should not be forfeited to the Central Government:

A. Held in the name of Yusuf Khan:

(i) House property at Door No.19, Nadu-Swankara Street, Trichy.

(ii) House property at Door NO.24-A, Nadu-Allimal Street, Trichy.

(iii) Right, title and interest in the firm, M/s.Basha Jewellery, No.178, Big Bazar Street, Trichy including the capital and current accounts as on 31.03.1976.

B. Held in the name of Pyari Ben:

(iv) House property at Door No.8, Swankara Street, Trichy.

(v) Land in Survey No.32/2 and 189/1, Thiruverumbur.

(i) The deceased first petitioner's husband challenged of SAFEMA and the detention in W.P.No.3098 of 1978 and obtained stay of further proceedings. However, the validity of the Act was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner submitted detailed objection to the notices, the property bearing Door No.19, Nadu Swankara Street, Trichy was purchased on 07.10.1958 by the deceased first petitioner's husband for a sum of Rs.7,500/-. He was carrying on business in artificial diamond jewellery from 1942 onwards. The competent authority failed to consider that it was not possible in 1977 to produce the accounts from the year 1942 when the business was established to the year 1958 when the property was purchased.

(ii) As far as the property bearing Door No.24-A, Allimal Street was concerned, it was explained and it was purchased for Rs.7,675/- including stamp charges by a sale deed dated 25.12.1967. The Income Tax Proceedings were submitted before the competent authority. The deceased first petitioner's husband explained that the property was purchased out of the income declared in the return for the assessment year 1968-69 in which a sum of Rs.11,850/- was shown as income. It may also pertinent to note that a loan of Rs.4,250/- had been taken and a loan of Rs.7,000/- on the mortgage of the property to one Smt.Sivakumari Ammal.

(iii) Insofar as the fourth item of property bearing Door No.8, Swankara Street, Trichy was concerned, the petitioner had purchased the same on 12.02.1965 for a sum of Rs.5,000/-. The petitioner had saved Rs.3,000/- from out of earnings through rolling Beedis. A sum of Rs.2,000/- was contributed by her husband. The competent authority has held that her husband had not explained the source for savings of Rs.2,000/- due to past of time the accounts were not available. The notice was issued in 1977, whereas the purchase had taken place in 1965.

(iv) The last property agricultural land was purch