Plea in Delhi HC to set aside court order over market value of Salman Rushdie's ancestral property

A plea has been filed in the Delhi High Court on Thursday that urges the setting aside of the single-judge bench order which estimated Booker Prize-winning author Salman Rushdie's ancestral property market value at Rs 130 crores.

As per the single bench Delhi High Court order dated December 24, 2019, the estimated market price of property ad-measuring 5373 square yards in Civil lines, which is the ancestral property of Booker Prize-winning author Salman Rushdie, is Rs 130 crores.

The market value of 4, Flagstaff Road, Civil Lines, which is adjacent to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's residence, was determined by the bench while hearing a 50-year-old legal battle between Salman Rushdie's father s Rushdie, and Congress leader Bhikhu Ram Jain.

Jain's sons Narender Jain and Arvind Jain filed an application seeking to set aside the order along with all the findings and observations contained therein to determine the market price of the suit property in terms of the Supreme Court order dated December 3, 2012, and direct the respondent to execute the sale deed in favour of the appellants.

A Division Bench of Justices Vipin Sanghi and Rekha Palli adjourned the matter for further hearing in April. The petitioner was represented by senior advocate Dushyant Dave.

In the appeal filed through advocate Rahul Malhotra, the petitioner said that the earlier order passed is "non-est, bad in law and passed blatant transgression of the directions passed by the Supreme Court and untenable on facts and in law".

The petitioner said that the court had failed to appreciate that the actual defendants Narender Jain and Arvind Jain, being the Legal Heir (LRs) of the original sole defendant, are required to be served with a notice in the suit proceedings so as to bring to their knowledge the existence of present petition and avoid multiplicity of proceedings which may be initiated in future in respect of the suit property.

It also raised that the trial judge has failed to appreciate that it is imperative upon a Court to ensure that the parties appearing before it are the actual parties to the petition and proxy litigation is not being pursued by some third party with/without knowledge of the original party to the plea.

The 2012 judgement had come on a suit pending since 1977, seeking specific performance of an Agreement to Sell dated December 22, 1970, by the deceased defendant s Ahmed Rushdie, father of Salman Rushdie with deceased plaintiff and Congress leader Bhiku Ram Jain, of the property for a total sale consideration of Rs 3.75 lakhs.

Out of the proposed amount, Jain had paid a sum of Rs 50,000 to s Ahmed Rushdie. During the pendency of proceedings, Bhikhu and s Rushdie, both expired and their heirs have also been substituted.

( With inputs from ANI )