Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.
Sewa Ram and others, Appellants
Versus
Union of India and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 2746 of 1980,
D/- 1-4-1997.
Enemy Property Act - Property Rights - The court held that the appellants could not acquire any valid title to the property from a citizen of Pakistan under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, as the seller ceased to be a citizen of India and had no right, title, or interest in the land after acquiring citizenship of Pakistan.
Fact of the Case:
Mohd. Marghoob Siddiqui, a citizen of Pakistan, sold property to the appellants. The respondents initiated proceedings against the property under the Enemy Property Act, 1968, claiming that Siddiqui was an enemy. The appellants filed a suit for injunction, which was unsuccessful, leading to this appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellants could not acquire any valid title to the property from Siddiqui, as he ceased to be a citizen of India after acquiring citizenship of Pakistan, rendering the proceedings and patta void. The appellants could not acquire any title by virtue of the sale effected by Siddiqui.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants had acquired a valid title to the property from a citizen of Pakistan under the Enemy Property Act, 1968.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that since the seller ceased to be a citizen of India and had no right, title, or interest in the land after acquiring citizenship of Pakistan, the appellants could not acquire any title by virtue of the sale.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded to the appellants.
JUDGMENT :— This appeal by special leave arises from the order dated 31-7-1979 of the High Court of Allahabad made in Civil Revision No. 84 of 1978.
2. The admitted position is that one Mohd. Marghoob Siddiqui had migrated to Pakistan prior to August 14, 1947 and became a citizen of Pakistan. His mother Kabool Fatima who remained in India died on August 7, 1965. Subsequently, he came to India and appears to have obtained the Bhumidari rights of his mother and sold the property to the appellants. The respondents had initiated proceedings against the property on the ground that Mohd. Marghoob Siddiqui was an enemy and there-fore, the Enemy Property Act, 1968 (Act No. 34 of 1968) was applicable. The appellants claimed title to the property. Subsequent thereto, the appellants filed a suit for injunction to restrain the respondents from taking possession of the property. Ultimately they came to be unsuccessful in the revision before the High Court. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
3. The only question is whether the appellants have acquired any valid title to the property from Mohd. Marghoob Siddiqui, a citizen of Pakistan? On his acquiring citizenship of Pakistan, M. M. Siddiqui ceased to be a citizen of India and thereby after the demise of his mother, he had no right, title or interest in the land to obtain Bhumidari right. The proceedings and patta are void.
4. Under these circumstances, since the purchaser cannot have a better title than the seller himself had, the appellants could not acquire any title by virtue of sale effected by Mohd. Marghoob Siddiqui.
5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Appeal dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
