For Mohammed Mehboob Ali, 79, and Hamida, 68, who were fighting for their right to live with dignity, dragging their son Shamshad to court had been the toughest call they took as parents
Mohammed Mehboob Ali (79) and Hamida
ADVERTISEMENT
For Mohammed Mehboob Ali, 79, and Hamida, 68, who were fighting for their right to live with dignity, dragging their son Shamshad to court had been the toughest call they took as parents. But, the humiliation they faced over the property dispute convinced them otherwise. "This judgment will help other senior citizens, who are tortured at the hands of their children, to raise their voice against the injustice," said advocate Dinesh Tiwari, who is representing the couple.
Also Read: Bombay High Court kicks out son who stole Malad flat from father
Long-drawn court battle
Mehboob first approached the Dindoshi city civil court in 2014 after Shamshad claimed ownership of the 900-sqft flat, the value of which runs into crores. Shamshad, a Merchant Navy captain, had been living with his parents in the said flat for the last two decades. After the Dindoshi court passed a judgment in favour of the old couple in August 2016, Shamshad approached the HC.
In his plea, Shamshad’s lawyer PJ Thorat informed the court that his client was the "gratuitous licensee and had also invested money in purchase of the said flat and therefore, he was entitled to continue to stay and also had right over the property".
However, challenging his claims, advocate Tiwari informed the court that in the year 1985, the collector of Mumbai had allotted a plot of land in Malwani, Malad, for constructing housing accommodation for retired Navy officers. His client, Mehboob, who retired in the year 1976, was enrolled as a member of the society. The flat was handed to him 11 years later, in 1996. Shamshad, who was 24 at the time, produced no record to show how he had helped finance the acquisition of the flat.
Justice MS Sonak, who was hearing the case, came down heavily on Shamshad. "Apart from brazenly asserting that he is owner of the suit flat, appellant No. 1 (Shamshad) has neither instituted any counter claim in the present suit nor ownership in respect of the said flat. From this, it is quite clear that the appellants had raised a patently false and a frivolous defence, claiming ownership," said Justice Sonak in his order.
On April 3, the HC passed an order evicting Shamshad and his family from their flat. mid-day had reported the story in it’s April 17 edition.
Violation of HC order
Following the order, the son had even given a written undertaking to the HC, stating that his family would vacate the premises within eight weeks, as his daughter was appearing for the SSC examination. While the HC had granted the extension, Shamshad refused to follow the HC order and continued to stay in the flat thereafter.
Advocate Tiwari said that Shamshad did not stick to his undertaking and was hence, guilty of contempt of court. "But, my client was only keen to take possession of the said property and therefore, moved a notice of motion before the trial court." The civil court, after hearing both the sides, passed an order in favour of the parents on August 14 and has directed the police to provide protection, if required. Advocate Tiwari said that the couple would soon be moving the HC. "We will file a criminal contempt of court plea against Shamshad and his wife for not abiding by the undertaking given by them to the HC."
Despite many attempts, Shamshad and his lawyer remained unavailable for comment.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
