Bollywood | Entertainment | India News :  Reports suggest that properties estimated to be worth Rs 150 billion owned by the Pataudi family, with a partial link to Saif Ali Khan, could be taken over by the Indian government under the Enemy Property Act, 1968. 

Bollywood actor Saif Ali Khan has been in the spotlight for a while now. He may have been discharged and on the road to recovery after a knife attack, but his woes are far from over. Latest reports suggest that properties worth an estimated Rs 150 billion owned by the Pataudi family, with a partial link to Saif Ali Khan, could be taken over by the Indian government under the Enemy Property Act, 1968. In 2019, the Madhya Pradesh High Court lifted the stay imposed on these properties. Some of these properties in the ruling included Saif’s childhood home Flag Staff House, the Noor-Us-Sabah Palace, Dar-Us-Salam, Bungalow of Habibi, Ahmedabad Palace, Kohefiza Property, among others. Now, the government may seize these properties under the Enemy Property Act that allows the government to take over properties belonging to persons who migrated to Pakistan after the Partition. What is the Enemy Property Act, 1968? The Enemy Property Act, 1968 gives the government the power to claim properties owned by those who migrated to Pakistan after Partition. Following the India-Pakistan wars of 1965 and 1971, many migrated from India to Pakistan, leaving behind their ancestral property. The Defence of India Act, 1962, states that the Indian government can take over properties and companies of individuals who took Pakistani nationality. The central government vested these “enemy properties” in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. This was also done on the properties left by those who migrated to China after the 1962 Sino-Indian war. The Enemy Property Act, 1968, was amended in 2017. The amended act now expands the definition of “enemy subject” to include the enemy’s legal heir and successor “whether or not a citizen of India or the citizen of a country which is not an enemy or the enemy, enemy subject or his legal heir and successor who has changed his nationality." Kapil Sharma death threat: Indian comedian receives threat from Pakistan, sender demands reply in 8 hours How is the Pataudi family's property linked to the Enemy Property Act? Bhopal's last Nawab was Hamidullah Khan when India gained independence from British rule in 1947. He had three daughters. His eldest, Abida Sultan, migrated to Pakistan in 1950. The second daughter, Sajida Sultan, remained in India, and was married to Nawab Iftikhar Ali Khan Pataudi- the Nawab of Pataudi, Haryana. Sajida became the legal heir after her father's death. Sajida's son was former cricketer Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi. His son Saif Ali Khan, the grandson of Sajida, inherited a share of the properties. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Saba Pataudi (@sabapataudi) View this post on Instagram A post shared by Saba Pataudi (@sabapataudi View this post on Instagram A post shared by Saba Pataudi (@sabapataudi) In 2014, the Custodian of the Enemy Property Department declared the Pataudi family’s properties in Bhopal as “enemy property”. The government argued that Abida Sultan, Sajida's elder sister, had migrated to Pakistan, and hence the properties could be termed as "enemy property." The dispute over the Pataudi family property was fuelled further after a 2016 ordinance by the Indian government stated that heirs would not have any right over the property. Saif Ali Khan gets grand welcome post hospital discharge, home lit up with lights The Pataudi family moved the MP High Court in 2015 against the Custodian’s notice declaring the Pataudi family’s properties as “enemy property”. The HC put a stay on the property at the time, but in 2019, recognised Sajida Sultan as the legal heir. However, last month, the High Court dismissed Saif’s petition. Saif Ali Khan meets auto driver who rushed him to hospital after knife attack Who owns the Pataudi Palace? Saif is also the legal heir to the Pataudi Palace. Earlier the palace was leased out to a hotel chain. “My father leased it out and Francis (Wacziarg) and Aman (Nath), who ran a hotel there took good care of the property. My mother (Sharmila Tagore) has a cottage there and she was always very comfortable,” Saif had said in an earlier interview. “It was a fair financial arrangement and contrary to reports, I did not have to buy it back because I already owned it,” Saif said in an interview with Bollywood Hungama in 2021. Saif now uses the palace as a summer home and often leases it out for the purpose of film shooting. Also read: Saif Ali Khan stabbing case: Intruder stabbed actor to free himself from his grip, recounts chilling details to cops In a recent interview with Housing.com, his sister Soha shared some more insights about the palace’s history, and said that Saif is the one who owns it. Soha revealed that her grandmother, Sajida Sultan, was the begum of Bhopal, and her grandfather was the nawab of Pataudi. He loved her for many years but hadn’t been allowed to marry her by her father. “The Pataudi Palace was built to impress his father-in-law.” Soha added, “He built it in 1935 so that they could get married. He wanted to impress his father-in-law but halfway through building it, he ran out of money! So when you go there, you will see there are lots of carpets and some of them have marble floors underneath, but a lot of them have just normal cement, because he ran out of money.” Saif Ali Khan has so far not reacted to the new court ruling that may lead to the seizure of some of his property. Khan has been recovering after a knife attack that took place at his Mumbai residence on January 16 when an attacker tried to flee after a failed attempt at burglary. Saif got into a scuffle in the process, and was stabbed by the intruder.

Explained: Why Saif Ali Khan's family could lose ancestral property worth Rs 150 billion

The goose that lays the golden eggs in Indian cricket is finally going to have a say in the running of the game in the country with a national players' association inching closer to becoming a reality.

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has traditionally abhorred the idea of a players' association, regarding it completely unnecessary and potentially troublesome.

On rare occasions when such a body was mooted, top players usually stayed away as joining it would mean incurring the wrath of the world's richest cricket board.

Things changed two years ago when the country's top court put a Committee of Administrators in charge following the board's failure to implement administrative reforms suggested by a panel led by former chief justice R.M. Lodha.

One of the key recommendations of the Lodha committee was to form a players' union and subsequently a steering committee was formed to facilitate the process.

Former India batsman Anshuman Gaekwad, a member of the committee, said the paperwork was nearly complete and before long <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/sports/virat-kohli-is-exceptionally-open-to-ideas-vettori-216524&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjc2d2EpoviAhW363MBHXHTDssQFjABegQIEBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw3IVf4svofoGt8_GPesDc5h">Virat Kohli</a> and his India teammates would have a voice in things that affect their career.

"We're going to have an association very soon. It's very important for the players," Gaekwad told Reuters by telephone.

A gutsy opening batsman who played 40 tests between 1975-85, Gaekwad regretted not having such players' body during his cricketing days.

"We tried it twice in the 1970s but it did not work out," he added.

BCCI Chief Executive Rahul Johri did not immediately respond to call and message seeking comment.

A stronger effort was made in early 2000 when Indian Cricket Players' Association (ICPA) was floated with former captain Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi as its president.

But the ICPA too failed to attract the top players and fizzled out.

"It did not work out because the BCCI was against it," former India opener Arun Lal, who was the ICPA vice-president, told Reuters from Kolkata.

"The players were scared of the board, which is only natural. It's hardly expected of a young cricketer to do something if the secretary of his state association warns him against it. The board always had an antagonistic approach to a players' association. They saw it like a trade union movement", Lal said.

Lal, who played 16 tests for India, said a players' body was integral to the game across the globe.

"More than anything else, the cricketers then become responsible for their game.&nbsp;At the moment, a cricketer is just a player. But once an association comes into being, he's a partner in taking the game forward'',&nbsp;the 63-year-old added.

"Players then become more responsible and aware of their duty to retain cricket's more than 200 years of legacy and not bring disrepute to the game", he said.

The Federation of International Cricketers Associations (FICA) welcomed the possibility of having an Indian players' body in the coming months.

"The existence of a body that can collectively represent the players in India, the world's biggest cricket economy, is an important step forward for the game," the global players' representative body said in a statement.

"It is critical that players are involved in the development and governance of any association set up to collectively represent them, in order to ensure its effectiveness," FICA executive chairman Tony Irish said.

"We would welcome a player-established Indian cricketers' association, which meets our membership and minimum standards requirements, into FICA and as part of the global collective of the world's cricketers", Irish said.

The goose that lays the golden eggs in Indian cricket is finally going to have a say in the running of the game in the country with a national players' association inching closer to becoming a reality.

The goose that lays the golden eggs in Indian cricket is finally going to have a say in the running of the game in the country with a national players' association inching closer to becoming a reality. The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has traditionally abhorred the idea of a players' association, regarding it completely unnecessary and potentially troublesome. On rare occasions when such a body was mooted, top players usually stayed away as joining it would mean incurring the wrath of the world's richest cricket board. Things changed two years ago when the country's top court put a Committee of Administrators in charge following the board's failure to implement administrative reforms suggested by a panel led by former chief justice R.M. Lodha. One of the key recommendations of the Lodha committee was to form a players' union and subsequently a steering committee was formed to facilitate the process. Former India batsman Anshuman Gaekwad, a member of the committee, said the paperwork was nearly complete and before long Virat Kohli and his India teammates would have a voice in things that affect their career. "We're going to have an association very soon. It's very important for the players," Gaekwad told Reuters by telephone. A gutsy opening batsman who played 40 tests between 1975-85, Gaekwad regretted not having such players' body during his cricketing days. "We tried it twice in the 1970s but it did not work out," he added. BCCI Chief Executive Rahul Johri did not immediately respond to call and message seeking comment. A stronger effort was made in early 2000 when Indian Cricket Players' Association (ICPA) was floated with former captain Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi as its president. But the ICPA too failed to attract the top players and fizzled out. "It did not work out because the BCCI was against it," former India opener Arun Lal, who was the ICPA vice-president, told Reuters from Kolkata. "The players were scared of the board, which is only natural. It's hardly expected of a young cricketer to do something if the secretary of his state association warns him against it. The board always had an antagonistic approach to a players' association. They saw it like a trade union movement", Lal said. Lal, who played 16 tests for India, said a players' body was integral to the game across the globe. "More than anything else, the cricketers then become responsible for their game. At the moment, a cricketer is just a player. But once an association comes into being, he's a partner in taking the game forward'', the 63-year-old added. "Players then become more responsible and aware of their duty to retain cricket's more than 200 years of legacy and not bring disrepute to the game", he said. The Federation of International Cricketers Associations (FICA) welcomed the possibility of having an Indian players' body in the coming months. "The existence of a body that can collectively represent the players in India, the world's biggest cricket economy, is an important step forward for the game," the global players' representative body said in a statement. "It is critical that players are involved in the development and governance of any association set up to collectively represent them, in order to ensure its effectiveness," FICA executive chairman Tony Irish said. "We would welcome a player-established Indian cricketers' association, which meets our membership and minimum standards requirements, into FICA and as part of the global collective of the world's cricketers", Irish said.

Kohli & Co go from mute golden goose to vocal stakeholders as Players' Association is on the cards

mansur-ali-khan-pataudi

Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, News on Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, stories on Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, articles on Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi stories at Wion, Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi news, Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi latest news

mansur ali-khan-pataudi

Explained: Why Saif Ali Khan's family could lose ancestral property worth Rs 150 billion

Kohli & Co go from mute golden goose to vocal stakeholders as Players' Association is on the cards