HYDERABAD: The municipal commissioner of Hyderabad has submitted in a civil court that the plot No. 1414 measuring 292 sq-yds under survey No. E/770/1, situated inside the 18th century Pucca Qila, was fraudulently acquired by a person who had managed its lease deed.

His statement, also signed by the assistant director of Hyderabad Municipal Corporation`s katchi abadis department, was filed in the court of the fifth senior civil judge by Syed Khalid Bukhari, the authorised officer for defendants, in response to a suit filed by Mohammad Shaukat, a veteran activist of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement, Hyderabad).

The municipal commissioner, in his para-wise comments, contested plaintiff Mohammad Shaukat`s claim of being legal and lawful owner ofthe suit property.

He explained to the court that the suit property was a governmentowned site protected under relevant local and international [heritage] laws. He cited the city survey record to insist that the property belonged to the Sindh government, HMC and Pakistan Works Department whereas the provincial department of culture, tourism and antiquities was its custodian.

The municipal commissioner (MC) stated that the leasedeedofthesuitproperty was fraudulently executed in favour of Maqsood Ahmed Khan, son of Hakeem Mohammad Khan, by the defunct taluka municipal administration (city). Under a letter No. G/506 dated Aug 3, 2009, the lease deed had been declared null and void and the entry in revenue record had also been cancelled.He also referred to the then deputy district officer`s relevant letter dated Oct 28, 2009 in this regard. Besides, he said, through a letter dated May 14, 2011, then assistant archaeology engineer had requested the SHO of the Fort police station to register an FIR against Maqsood Ahmed Khan.

The municipal commissioner informed the court that he (MC) had withdrawn a letter dated April 9, 2019 in favour of Mr Maqsood which was issued by then project director to the Sindh Building Control Authority (SBCA) for being null and void of merits. Hence, he said, the transactions managed fraudulently were liable to be cancelled by this court, he maintained.

Plaintiff`s claim In his suit, plaintiff Mohammad Shaukat, stated that he was the legal and lawful owner of the property. Previously, he explained, the suit property was leased from defendant No. 2 (assistant director of katchiabadis) by Mr Maqsood Khan on June 18, 2009 vide registration No. 2763 and thereafter he [the plaintiff] purchased it from Mr Maqsood Khan under an agreement dated Oct 25, 2012. He stated that on Jan 11, 2013, Mr Maqsood Khan executed the sale deedin his [the plaintiff`s] favour.

He said that possession of suit property was handed over to the plaintiff under this agreement.

He stated that on June 11, 2015, the office of the katchi abadis issued a letter to the SHO concerned informing him that the suit property was leased out to Mr Maqsood Khan.

The additional deputy commissioner of Hyderabad also issued a letter dated July 5, 2023 by which the plaintiff`s ownership of the suit property was accepted and the mukhtiarkar concerned was directed to demarcate the plot, he said, adding that accordingly the mukhtiarkarissued a letter to the Director Settlement Survey & Land Records for demarcation and he [the plaintiff] started construction on it.

However, the Hyderabad deputy commissioner, along with the SHO concerned, visited the suit property and got the construction work stopped even after the plaintiff produced the ownership documents.

Mr Shaukat stated that he approached the department concerned for redressal of his grievance but in vain.

He prayed the court to restrain the defendants from harassing or dispossessing him from the suit property.

The court adjourned the matter till Nov 15 after time was sought on behalf of the deputy commissioner and culture department. The court ordered that status quo passed in the matter should continue till the next date of hearing.