A great-great grand son of courtier Nawab Qasim Jan of Mughal emperor Shah Alam II (1728-1806),still living in his ancestral house at Ballimaran in Walled City area here,has been restrained by a Delhi court to sell his ailing sister’s share in the inherited property.
Additional Senior Civil Judge (ASCJ) N K Malhotra refused to allow Naved Yaar Khan,son of late Nawab Sultan Yar Khan of Ballimaran,to sell his sister’s property,dismissing his plea to lift the December 16 interim order of a civil court,restraining him from disposing it of.
Naved Yaar Khan,also a distant relative of famous Urdu poet Mirza Ghalib and still known as ‘nawab saab’ in Ballimaran,had come to the ASCJ’s court,challenging an interim order of the lower civil court restraining him from selling the property share of his 55-year-old sister Rubina Sultan,suffering from cerebral palsy.
The lower civil court had barred Naved Yaar Khan from selling Rubina’s share in their ancestral property on a plea by late Nawab’s five other heirs.
In their pleas,the heirs of late Nawab Sultan Yar Khan had said four sons and four daughters of the Nawab had settled their property division in 2000 after their father’s death in 1995.
They had alleged Naved Yar Khan had obtained the thumb impression of Rubina to sell her share of property and to withdraw money from her post office account.
They had also claimed Naved Yar Khan had suppressed the fact that he had paid an earnest money of over Rs 20.80 lakh to buy a house in Ghaziabad for over Rs 52 lakh using his sister’s money.
On the plea by late Nawab’s other heirs,the lower civil court had restrained Naved Yar Khan from selling or creating any third party interest in Rubina’s property,prompting him to come to a superior civil court in appeal against it.
While dismissing Naved’s plea,the ASCJ also referred to an October 2011 order of another court on his plea to be made Rubina’s guardian.
The court had said Naved’s interest were “adverse” to that of Rubina and he was “unfit” to be appointed as her guardian.
The ASCJ held that the matter did not require interference at this stage as the civil court’s order was an interim order and the issue is yet to be decided finally on merits.
“As the application under provisions of Civil Procedure Code is yet to be decided,I am of the view that there is no reason to interfere in the order of the learned trial court as the appellant has not placed on record any document to show that appellant no. 2 (Rubina Sultan) is not suffering from cerebral palsy,” it held.
“I am of the view that the appeals deserve to be dismissed when the learned trial court has not decided the application on merits,” it added.