Telangana High Court. (DC)
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court will decide on whether the execution of a sale deed (dated 21.5.1966) bearing document No. 1544 of 1966, between the last Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan and another, and some members of the Paigah family, has to be accepted or cancelled. Saturday, incidentally, was the Nizam’s birth anniversary.
The common sale deed is said to have been executed for the transfer of approximately 38,70,720 shares of Paigah land at Hydernagar, Hasmathpet, Malkaram, Khaderabad, Ghansaiguda and other places to Mir Osman Ali Khan and one other by the members of the Paigah family, who are the parties in the CS 14/1958 related case.
The land, presently worth thousands of crores, were in 1967 transferred to Cyrus Investments Ltd of Mumbai.
The 11th Additional Chief Judge at the City Civil Court here issued orders on December 7, 2023, cancelling the sale deed of 1966. He also set aside the trial court orders, which had declared that the sale deed would have validity, on the ground that a family member of the Paigahs, Sahebzadi Hameediunnisa Begum, had approached the court after expiry of the limitation period, approximately 50 years after the sale deed was executed.
Challenging the orders, Cyrus Investments, through its representative Dr P.S. Prasad, approached the High Court by filing a second appeal seeking that the orders of the 11th Additional Chief Judge be set aside. The High Court admitted the second appeal, as Cyrus Investments raised an objection on the point of limitation period.
However, Mohammed Moizuddin Khan, legal representative of Hameedunnisa Begum (after her death), objected to the authority of Prasad in filing the appeal on behalf of Cyrus Investments, without any general power of attorney from the firm. Further, he submitted that his mother came to know about the common sale deed of 1966 only in 2013 and had approached the trial court in 2016, after getting all certified copies.
Moreover, the sale deed did not say about the total consideration and there were blanks in the sale deed, which were filled by a pen. As the parties to the appeal filed counters, the High Court will hear the case and decide about the validity of the sale deed.
Before the trial court, Hameedunnisa Begum had argued that the sale deed was fabricated, as she was nine years old in 1966 but Cyrus Investments showed it as 22. Further, it was showed that she had received part share of consideration Rs 5,000 from the Nizam, out of a total consideration Rs 10,000 of her share.
In the counter filed before the High Court, Hameedunnisa Begum’s son Moizuddin disputed the sale deed and provided a chronology. He said that Cyrus Investments had claimed that it had bought the Paigah properties from the Nizam VII through a registered sale deed document 2326/1967, which was registered and released on July 28, 1967.
However, February 21, 1967, the Nizam was seriously ill. His condition deteriorated the next day and he was put on oxygen support, and his financial adviser C.B. Tarapoorwala was with him all along. The Nizam breathed his last at 1.22 pm on Feb 24, 1967, as per the death certificate.
The sale deed in favour of Cyrus Investments on the name of Nizam was presented on March 17, 1967, for registration by Taraporewala as the GPA after the death of the Nizam. This document, No. 2326/1967, was registered and released on July 28 of that year. He claimed that the sale deed in favour of Cyrus was invalid because sale deed it was executed by the agent after the demise of the Nizam, the principal.
( Source : Deccan Chronicle )
Next Story
