Kapurthala House to stay with Punjab government, rules Delhi High Court

The Kapurthala House, currently the official residence of the Punjab chief minister in New Delhi, will continue to remain in the state government’s possession as the Delhi high court has rejected the erstwhile Kapurthala ruler’s right to sell it.

A government spokesperson said in its July 31 order, the copy of which was received on Tuesday, a two-judge bench of justices S Muralidhar and Talwant Singh ruled that the No 3 Mansingh Road property could not be sold ruler had lost title to the property following its requisition by the government of India.

The case was argued in the court on behalf of the Punjab government by senior advocate Kapil Sibal. The respondents were the Union of India, which submitted that it had handed over possession of the property to Punjab, finding it to be the rightful owner.

The Kapurthala House, located near Connaught Place, was the residence of the erstwhile residence of the maharaja of Kapurthala in Delhi.

Giving details of the case, Punjab advocate general Atul Nanda said Kapurthala was a sovereign state till its merger with the Patiala and East Punjab States Union (PEPSU) and the subsequent merger of PEPSU into the dominion of India.

The property was requisitioned through an order passed on June 17, 1950, under Section 3 of the Delhi Premises (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1947. On December 4, 1950, the government of India took possession of the property in question from late Radheshyam Makhanilal Seksaria, who was said to have purchased it from late Maharaja Paramjit Singh, former ruler of the Kapurthala state, by a registered sale deed dated January 10, 1950, for a consideration of ₹1.5 lakh.

“Incidentally, the 1947 Act was repealed by the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. Under Section 24 of the 1952 Act, properties that had been requisitioned under the 1947 Act were deemed to have been requisitioned under the 1952 Act,” said Nanda.

The dispute arose when Seksaria filed a suit in 1960 for declaration of his title to the property in a Delhi district court from where it was subsequently transferred to the high court in 1967. During the suit’s pendency, Seskaria died and his four children were substituted as plaintiffs in their capacity as his legal representatives.

In 1989, a single-judge of the HC decided in favour of the plaintiffs on the grounds that it had been derequisitioned by the government of India in 1987, on the expiry of 17 years as mandated by the 1952 Act. The Punjab government had gone in an appeal soon after and a division bench of the HC held that the plaintiffs had no right at all in the property in question.

Several appeals and applications followed through the years in the high court as well as the Supreme Court, with the now repealed RTI also being used by the petitioners to fight their case, which finally came again before a division bench of the Delhi high court, said Nanda.

The bench has dismissed the petitioner’s right to the property on the ground that the erstwhile ruler of Kapurthala had no title to the property after its requisition. Hence, he could not have conferred valid title on the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners.

First Published: Aug 07, 2019 20:20 IST