State bound to protect property of missing owners: SHC

Karachi
The Sindh High Court has observed that state was duty bound to protect ownerless properties from illegal occupation.
The observation came in a lawsuit by Nanney Khan claiming possession of a 120 square yards property in the Khudadad Colony as owner of the plot had died abroad. The plaintiff claimed he purchased the land from a real estate agent and despite payment was not given possession.
The court, however, dismissed the claim of the plaintiff observing he was not entitled to claim specific performance of contract he signed with a real estate agent on June 29, 2009 and he has lost his right to retain the possession of the suit property.
The court observed that it was the duty of the court to ensure that unscrupulous estate agent like the defendant should not meddle with the suit property or for that matter with any other immovable property on realising that the whereabouts of actual owners of the said property were not available and the property in a way was unclaimed or abandoned or it has really become ownerless.
The bench observed that it was the duty of the court that once it was found that no one was available to claim ownership of any immoveable property in his own right or by means of inheritance, the property would be treated as an ownerless property.
The court said that even the state would be allowed to take possession of such property under Article 24, clause 3(d) of the Constitution for a limited period to protect it for the benefit of its owner, adding that in a situation like the one in hand the court was required to find out the actual owner and/or his/her legal heirs before holding that the suit property was escheatable.
The court ordered Nazir to visit the place within 48 hours and take photographs of the suit premises to preserve the status of the fitting and fixtures.
The court observed that since the owner reportedly belongs to minority, therefore it has become even more serious duty of the state and the court to extend maximum protection to safeguard the legitimate right and interest of the owner. The court directed the Nazir to complete the exercise within six months by placing a board in front of the property stating that the property was in possession of the High Court and if anybody knows whereabouts of the owner or claimant he or she may approach the Nazir and in case nobody turns up to claim his title to the suit property within six months the suit property shall be deemed to have been escheated to the state in terms of Article 172.
The court dismissed the lawsuit by imposing fine of Rs 100,000 on the plaintiff for illegally possessing the suit property since August 2009. The Nazir was ordered to attach the moveable properties of the plaintiff for recovery of the amount, if he failed to pay the fine within seven days.