Summary: This case is about a property in Delhi that was originally owned by Mr. Sheikh Barkatullah. It's been involved in a long legal fight over whether it should be considered "enemy property" under Indian law. The property has been sold several times but is still controlled by the Custodian of Enemy Property. The High Court of Delhi dismissed the petition challenging this status on December 10, 2025.
The property is located at Chatta Haji Mohd. Yusuf, Chitla Gate, Churiwalan, Delhi. It was first owned by Mr. Sheikh Barkatullah and sold to Mr. Haji Mohd. Muslim on December 13, 1961. The people who brought the case, Ashan Ur Rab and others, have been living there since the early 1960s.
On September 10, 1965, the Indian government announced that properties owned by Pakistani nationals in India would be considered enemy properties. Since Mr. Haji Mohd. Muslim moved to Pakistan in 1964, he was considered a Pakistani national, and his property was taken over by the Custodian.
Even though the property was declared enemy property, it was sold multiple times. It went from Mr. Haji Mohd. Muslim to Mrs. Kausar Jamal in 1968, and then to others, including Mr. Salah Uddin in 1995. The people bringing the case claimed rights to the property through these sales.
The Custodian confirmed the property's status as enemy property on October 22, 2010. Ashan Ur Rab and others challenged this decision and a related certificate issued on the same date, but the Ministry of Home Affairs rejected their challenge on September 4, 2025.
The High Court, led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, dismissed the petition. They decided that Ashan Ur Rab and others could not prove Mr. Haji Mohd. Muslim was an Indian citizen or show that the property should not be considered enemy property. The petition was also dismissed because it was filed too late.
"The petitioners have utterly failed to discharge their burden of establishing that the subject property did not vest in the Custodian."
The court ruled that the property will remain with the Custodian because Ashan Ur Rab and others could not provide enough evidence to change its status or overcome the legal challenges they faced.
