2025High CourtLatestLegalOctober 2025Real Estate

Bombay HC Rejects Enemy Property Claim for want of Evidence

Enemy Property Act, 1968,                        

Bombay HC Rejects Enemy Property Claim without Evidence

Enemy Property Custodian Overreach Curbed – Bombay HC Demands Proof of Nationality before declaring and vesting Enemy Property

Citizenship and Migration  must be proved and not presumed for declaration of enemy property

The property survey no.157/4 of 15,948 sq.mts at Margao, Goa, was purchased by Husseimbhai Ramjee in 1944 and it was transferred to Badruddin Mavani by three Gift Deeds. 

Thus, the property travelled from Baddrudin Mavani resident of Margao born on 17.3.1923 to Hussenbhai Ramjee and Sanguinavai Nirali, his birth being registered on 1.5.1944.

Badruddin executed PoA and the said property was divided in 31 smaller plots. PoA executed agreement for sale with developer and the housing society was registered

On 12.12.1997 the Custodian of Enemy Property sent letters to the owners that the property owned by them was owned by Pakistani National Badruddin Hussenbhai Ramjee Mavani and Government Notification dated 10.9.1965 and S.O. No.5511 dated 18.12.1971 under the Defence of India Rules, 1971, the properties belonged to or held by or managed on behalf of a Pakistani national and in terms of Section 5 of the Enemy Property Act, 1968, vest in the Custodian.

On 8.10.2010, the Order was passed under Sections 5 and 24 of 1968 Act with reference to the Notification dated 10.9.1965 and the Enemy Property (Amendment) Act dated 27.9.1977 declaring that all movable and immovable properties belonging to or to be held or managed on behalf of Pakistani Nationals during the vesting crucial period has vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India and continued to remain vested under Sections 5 and 24 of the said Act.

HELD that it is necessary to establish that Badruddin Mavani was a Pakistani National to declare a property as enemy property.   Merely making an averment that he migrated to Pakistan without any proof, is not sufficient to declare the property as enemy property.  He was born in Goa.  Just because there is a citation in the law report in his name is not proof that he was a Pakistani National. Even there is no proof that he had subsequently migrated to Pakistan.  In fact, he had executed two Power of Attorney in 1970 and 1971 for transfer of properties.

Judgment dated 22.9.2025 of the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Writ Petition No.903 of 2025 (FILING) of Lotus Classique Housing Society and others  Vs.   Union of India and others

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I HAVE READ THE DISCLAIMER AND AGREE TO IT.

User Acknowledgement

By proceeding further and clicking on the "AGREE" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about LegalDeli for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from LegalDeli or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this knowledge site. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below.

Disclaimer
About: This knowledge-site (www.LegalDeli.in) is owned and operated by LegalDeli (“NDA”), and is a resource for your informational and educational purposes only.

No Warranty: NDA does not warrant that any content or information contained on this knowledge-site is accurate, correct, complete or up-to-date, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any actual or threatened loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or otherwise. NDA assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the content and/or information contained on this knowledge-site, nor does it offer any warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied in relation to such content or information.

Third-Party Links: NDA does not intend that links / URLs contained on this knowledge-site re-directing users to third party websites be considered as referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with any such third party website operators. NDA is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the content or information contained on such third party websites to which links may be provided on this knowledge-site.

No Legal Advice: By clicking ‘I agree’ and proceeding further, you acknowledge, represent and undertake that you on your own accord wish to know more about NDA, its capabilities and research content and information contained on the knowledge-site, for your own knowledge and personal use. The content and information contained on this knowledge-site should not be construed as nor relied upon as legal advice. You as a reader or recipient of content or information contained in this knowledge-site should not act, nor refrain from acting, based upon any or all of such content or information, but should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel licensed to practice the relevant law in the appropriate jurisdiction.

No Attorney-Client Relationship: This knowledge-site is not intended to be and you should not consider the content or information contained therein to be an advertisement, solicitation, inducement or invitation for an Attorney-Client relationship. Transmission, receipt or use of this knowledge-site, including content and information contained therein, does not constitute nor create an Attorney-Client relationship between NDA and you.