Back
2024 Supreme(Telangana) 343
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ALOK ARADHE, CJ, N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J.
Safdar-un-Nissa Begum alias Badi Sahebzadi, W/o. Nawab Shujahul Mulk, (Deceased) and Others - Plaintiffs
Versus
Nawab Ghazi Jung, S/o. Nawab Fakrul Mulk, (Deceased) and Others. - Defendants
Civil Suit No.9/1 of 1951
Decided On : 23-04-2024
For the Defendants : Mr. Vedula Srinivas representing Mr. N.M.Krishnaiah; Mr. Zakir Ali Danish; Mr. Mohd. Adnan; Mr. Mir Wajid Ali Kamil; Mr. M.Shiiva Kumar; Mr. P.Giri Krishna.
The court affirmed that the final decree in estate partition cases, based on compromises, ends litigation when respective shares are allocated and further claims are extinguished.
Headnote:(A) Preliminary Decree - Civil Suit No. 9/1 of 1951 - Plaintiffs sought partition and recovery of shares in Matruka property from late Nawab Fakhrul Mulk. Suit was remanded for trial under Section 19 of CPC, ultimately leading to a preliminary decree passed on 25.04.1951 based on three compromise petitions. Court confirmed that each of five branches of deceased heirs entitled to equal shares totaling 20% each in the Matruka property. (Paras 76, 90).
(B) Compliance of Decree - Reporting Receiver-cum-Commissioners appointed since 1951 for managing estate compliance with distributions has been challenged with multiple objections. Court accepted Receiver’s report dated 16.03.2023 confirming that no property remains for distribution, thus closing the civil suit. Objections regarding property claims were not substantiated with evidence and the Receiver's findings were upheld. (Paras 75, 90).
(C) Final Findings - Court found no remaining land available for partition after ongoing compliance with the decree and rejected claims for properties previously settled or sold. Report confirmed final decree status without outstanding claims and distributed court-held funds among parties involved while ensuring proper management of remaining estate properties. (Paras 99, 90).
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. history and background of the case's partition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's legal reasoning and judgment declaration. (Para 75) |
| 3. final ruling on the suit's closure. (Para 96 , 100) |
JUDGMENT:
(N.V. Shravan Kumar, J.) :
I. History, Background and brief facts of Civil Suit No.9/1 of 1951:
The Suit was originally filed between Nawab Ghaji Jung and heirs of Nawab Fakhr Jung. The Suit was filed on 15.05.1946 and the plaint was presented on 30.8.1951.
2. Originally Plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 filed a Suit in Darul Quaza Court on 04.07.1355 Fasli, which was decreed on 21.02.1358 Fasli. The Decree was set aside in view of compromise between the Two plaintiffs and the Defendant Nos.5 and 1 to 4 and 23 and compromise Decree was passed on 22.9.1950, and thereafter, the suit was remanded under Section 19 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to this High Court for trial regarding the rest of the defendants and the case was transferred to this High Court as the Court of Darul Quaza Court was abolished.
3. The record reveals that Nawab Fakher Jung died on 19.09.1934 leaving behind five (5) sons and four (4) daughters. The details are extracted from the report:
| “Sons |
|
| 1. Nawab Ghazi Jung | (Defendant No.1 in the suit) |
| 2. Nawab Fakhar Jung |
|
| 3. Nawab Raisyar Jung | (Defendant No.2 in the suit) |
| 4. Nawab Rais Jung | (Defendant No.3 in the suit) |
| 5. Nawab Shah Nawaz Jung | (Defendant No.4 in the suit) |
| Daughters |
|
| 1. Safdarunnisa Begum | (Plaintiff No.1 in the suit). |
| 2. Fakhrunnisa Begum | (Plaintiff No.2 in the suit). |
| 3. Raisathunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.5 in the suit). |
| 4. Zehra Talak Qamar Ara Begum | (Wife of defendant No.23) |
Fakhar Nawaz Jung Bahadur, husband of Zehra Talat Qamar Ara Begum, 4th daughter of the deceased, was brought on record as her legal representative and defendant No.23.
Heirs of Nawab Fakhar Jung, 2nd son of deceased had (8) sons, (11) daughters and (4) wives.
| (8) sons |
|
| 1. Mir Ajaz Hussain | (Defendant No.6 in the suit) |
| 2. Mir Mumtaz Hussain | (Defendant No.7 in the suit) |
| 3. Mir Liaqath Hussain | (Defendant No.9 in the suit) |
| 4. Mir Laik Hussain | (Defendant No.10 in the suit) |
| 5. Mir Jahangir Hussain | (Defendant No.14 in the suit) |
| 6. Mir Muzaffar Hussain | (Defendant No.16 in the suit) |
| 7. Mir Musharaff Hussain | (Defendant No.21 in the suit) |
| 8. Mir Amir Hussain | (Defendant No.24 in the suit) |
| (11) Daughters |
|
| 1. Dowarunninsa Begum | (Defendant No.20 in the suit) |
| 2. Badarunnisa Begum | (Died after inheriting a share in the Matruka of her father and in her place her mother, Meherunnisa Begum became a party in the suit as defendant No. 25) |
| 3. Tahawarunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.11 in the suit) |
| 4. Shamsunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.17 in the suit) |
| 5. Kifayathunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.12 in the suit) |
| 6. Nadarunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.18 in the suit) |
| 7. Zahoorunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.15 in the suit) |
| 8. Dilawarunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.13 in the suit) |
| 9. Vazeerunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.19 in the suit) |
| 10. Jahadarunnisa Begum | (Defendant No.8 in the suit) |
| 11. Chandni Begum | (Defendant No.22 in the suit) |
(4) Wives
They got their share out of the Court except Gowharunnisa Begum, the 4th wife who died after inheriting her share in the Matruka. This share devolved upon her sons defendant Nos.6 and 7 and her daughter defendant No.8 in the ratio of 2 : 1 as per the preliminary decree dated 25.04.1951.
2. The record reveals that three months after the death of Nawab Fakhrul Mulk, H.E.H. Nizam VII issued a ‘Firman’ (decree) appointing a Committee for the management of the estate of the deceased i.e., Jagir and Matruka. This Committee consisted
