New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday lifted the curtain on a 30-year-old royal dispute involving assets worth over Rs 20,000 crore, ruling in favor of the two surviving daughters of Sir Harinder Singh Brar, the last ruler of the erstwhile princely state of Faridkot.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) UU Lalit, after reserving its verdict in July this year, upheld the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court relating to the succession of the Maharaja’s property.
The court further ordered the immediate dissolution of the Maharawal Khewaji Trust, which till now was administering the properties of the ruler.
The then Raja of Faridkot had movable and immovable properties in many states including Punjab, Delhi and Haryana. His prominent properties include the Raj Mahal and Qila Mubarak in Faridkot, a charitable hospital and Faridkot House on Delhi’s Copernicus Marg.
Read also: After 34 years of appeal, a verdict – Allahabad HC has over 10 lakh cases. why over here
1948 Act and Mystery Will
Maharaja Harinder Singh, the then ruler of Faridkot, had entered into a document of merger with the Union of India in 1948. Through this instrument, he transferred the administration, authority, authority and jurisdiction of the princely state to the Union.
However, the Maharaja – the father of three daughters and one son – was entitled to full ownership of his personal properties.
He then enacted the Raja Faridkot Estate Act, 1948, which declared that in the event of his death, the ownership of his property would be transferred to his male heir.
But soon after the act, the Maharaja’s only son, Tikka Harmohinder Singh, died in a road accident along with his wife Narinder Kaur.
After Maharaja Harinder Singh’s own death in 1989, a will came to the fore.
According to this will, the ruler’s property was to be divided in equal shares between his two daughters, Princess Deepinder Kaur and Princess Mahipinder Kaur. The will ousted the Maharaja’s third daughter, Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, because she had married against her father’s wishes.
This will – executed in 1952 – specified that the Maharaja’s properties were to be inherited by the Maharwal Khewaji Trust, with his daughters Deepinder and Mahipinder to be trustees.
In 1992, Amrit Kaur, the eldest daughter of the ruler, filed a petition before the Chandigarh District Court challenging the will.
He argued that his father could not legally give his property to the Maharwal Khewaji Trust as the family was governed by the Hindu Joint Family Law. Amrit Kaur through her legal representatives also raised questions on the authenticity of her late father’s will.
Supreme Court orders
After 21 years, in 2013, the Chandigarh District Court ruled on the petition. Government That the will executed in 1952 was invalid, void and unenforceable.
The court then passed the inheritance to the two surviving daughters, Amrit and Deepinder; Mahpinder Kaur dead Under mysterious circumstances in 2001
The district court’s order was challenged by Rajkumari Deepinder Kaur, the trust and other trustees before the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which upheld the order in 2020.
The High Court further ruled that the descendants of Maharaja’s brother Manjit Inder Singh would be entitled to the share of their mother Mohinder Kaur.
In addition, the High Court also Told That the trustees “conspired” to make a will and take possession of the Maharaja’s property, ruling that the will in question was “forged, fictitious, fabricated and covered in suspicious circumstances”.
However, the same year the Maharawal Khewaji Trust challenged the High Court order in the Supreme Court. In 2021, the Supreme Court ordered That the trust may continue as a caretaker and ‘status quo’ be maintained.
Citing the Raja Faridkot Estate Act, 1948, the petitioners cited the “rule of primogeniture” in the Supreme Court to argue that the property left by the Maharaja was inherited by his male heir, his brother Kunwar Manjit Inder Singh, by his son Should be Bharat Inder Singh.
In its judgment on Wednesday, the Supreme Court said, “In view of the specific findings made by the courts below, including the High Court, in our view, no case was made out for the applicability of the rule of descent and succession on the basis of the said rule. ” ,
(Edited by Amritansh Arora)
Read also: Why Delhi HC quashes $562 million international arbitration award ISRO’s Antrix had to pay Devas