The Union cabinet approved a proposal mooted by the home ministry to pilot the bill in the November 9-December 13 winter session of parliament.
At least 2,168 properties originally belonging to citizens of the undivided pre-1965 Pakistan will get the cover of Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Second Bill, 2010, that seeks to amendment Enemy Property Act, 1968.
The Union cabinet approved a proposal mooted by the home ministry to pilot the bill in the November 9-December 13 winter session of parliament.
Effective retrospectively, the bill, once it becomes an act, will vest in the custodian all “enemy” properties till they are divested by the Centre.
The properties can be divested only to the owner or his/her lawful heir. If a property was divested from the custodian before July 2, 2010, it will remain under the custodian’s hold.
The bill, however, says if an enemy property is divested by the Union government by an order before July 2, 2010, or where the estate had been returned to the owner or his/her lawful heir by an order of the court and if the lawful heir is a citizen of India by birth, such property will continue to remain with such person.
An analyst feels India-born heirs to certain citizens of Pakistan wouldn’t have much difficulty in enjoying the property left behind by their ancestors after the 1965 war.
The bill envisages that the transfer of enemy property shall not include transfer or claim of transfer made through oral will or oral gift or if it has been done without the permission of the competent authority. Thus, a court order is a precondition to get the property back from the government.
Moreover, the court can’t direct the government or the custodian to divest any property at the claimant’s behest.
The amended law would have a strong bearing on the lawsuit by Dina Wadia (93), a British national, daughter of Mohammad Ali Jinnah and mother of industrialist Nusli Wadia, before the Bombay high court claiming the celebrated Jinnah House in Mumbai on the ground that her father had left no will.
According to Wadia, Jinnah was a Khoja Muslim and this sect follows Hindu law. Hence, the Hindu law that leaves property to both sons and daughters would apply.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}