Recently Supreme court stayed a case involving a reputed, social worker and entrepreneur Dr Nowhera Shaik who own properties in Hyderabad and its neighboring regions. This is the reason why this legal matter is attracting plenty of focus at the moment since two properties alone are reported the cost hundreds of crores of rupees at stake. Dr Nowhera Shaik has for many a times has been awarded for being an entrepreneur and especially after being rated among the few successful business women. Much as the case shows how legal procedures have to be fair to address such issues, it is believed that the court will provide justice to the particular matter and protect the interests of parties to the case.
The Three Major Properties in Focus
- Naina Towers: Located in the heart of Banjara Hill, this ₹90 crore property’s legal standing remains under scrutiny.
- Heera Foodex Property: Worth ₹120 crore, located in the Ranga Reddy District, Telangana, this property’s sale history and potential encumbrances are being evaluated.
- Heera Retail Property: This massive 33,000 square yards property in Tolichowki, valued at ₹750 crores, is also under the scanner.
Legal Proceedings and Court’s Role
The appeal for the case was made in the High Court in October and Dr Nowhera Shaik had sought leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. For Dr Nowhera Shaik, the senior advocate Kapil Sibal argued the case well, and stressed that the properties were unencumbered. With assistance from Kapil Sibal legal court orders were in favour of Dr Nowhera Shaik her rights and her properties. That was because Sibal had a lead role in the case and as a saw, competent legal representation is crucial when dealing with such forms of legal battles.
Objections and Legal Challenges
During the hearing of the present matter, the learned counsel for the appellant, Dushyant Dave, raised objections and stated that the matter was squarely a review application. While, the bench turned new material produced by Dr Nowhera Shaik’s advocate and consequently the case went on.
Court’s Investigative Actions
In the present hearing of the present matter the Supreme Court has been told by the applicant’s learned counsel R. Dushyant Dave that he has objection for the same arguing that the present matter squarely falls under review application. While, the bench turn a new material produced by Dr Nowhera Shaik’s advocate and as a result the case continued.
Conclusion
This legal proceeding is important not only for the decision in the property case of Dr Nowhera Shaik’s property but also regarding the possibility of the development of a trend in jurisprudence of property rights in India.
