Telangana HC rejects appeal over order on Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan's Fern Hill property

The appellant stated that despite the possession being taken on August 3, 1976, the Trust received no compensation, forcing it to move court.
Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan Bahadur (Photo  Wikipedia Commons)
Nizam Mir Osman Ali Khan Bahadur (Photo Wikipedia Commons)

HYDERABAD: A division bench of the Telangana High Court dismissed an appeal against a single judge’s order in an age-old civil dispute over acquisition of some property belonging to Nizam-VII Mir Osman Ali Khan.

Dismissing the plea, the division bench held that the single judge had correctly dismissed the writ petition.

The appeal was brought by the 'Fern Hill Trust', represented by its Trustee Mahmood bin Mohammed, who stated that the Trust was established on March 3, 1957 by the former Nizam-VII of Hyderabad under a Trust Deed for the benefit of his seven children born to his wife Laila Begum.

He contended that the Trust Deed included an area of 25 acres of land in Sy.Nos. 318/1 and 318/2 of Gaddiannaram village, Hyderabad Urban District, and an area of 3.8 acres in Sy. No.318/1 was used by the Union of India, represented by the Director Doordarshan Kendra Ministry of Information Broadcasting Ramanthapur, for the establishment of a TV Transmission Station by invoking the provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act.

The appellant stated that despite the possession being taken on August 3, 1976, the Trust received no compensation, forcing it to move court.Counsel for the petitioner claimed that while dismissing the petition, the single judge without recognising any of the appellant’s contentions, offered him the liberty to figure out the right remedy available under law before the suitable venue for redressal of its grievance.

Assistant Solicitor General N Rajeswara Rao, representing the State and the Government Pleader for Land Acquisition, argued that there are various points of dispute involved, as well as the size of the property as defined by the Trust Deed.

The ASG argued that according to the Trust Deed, only five acres was Trust property, not 25 acres as claimed by the appellant, and the location of the TV Transmission Station itself does not constitute part of Sy.No.318/1 as claimed by the appellant.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com