Least Plausible For Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin To Think Of Appointing Successor Immediately After Assuming Office In 1965: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court observed that Taher Fakhruddin, challenger to his uncle Mufaddal Saiffuddin's position as the Dai al-Mutlaq of the Dawoodi Bohra community, accepted vague indications for his own nass, but dismissed concrete evidence for the nass conferred on Syedna Saifuddin.“Clearly, the Plaintiff applies different standards to the nass he claims was conferred on himself and the nussoos of the Defendant. It is all right, we are told, if the nass on the Original Plaintiff did not use the words nass, Mansoos, crown, or anything of the kind. It does not matter that it was without witnesses and in private, and never revealed or even alluded to...But for the Defendant, audio, video, and the depositions of those actually present are all worthless. The court's own study and appreciation of the audio-visual material is worthless”, the court highlighted.The court found it “least plausible” that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin, the 52nd Dai, immediately thought of appointing his successor upon assuming office in 1965 at 51 years of age, as claimed by Fakhruddin.“It is not impossible. But what is the likelihood of this as compared to a time five years later in 1969, with things firmly under control, and a spiritual leader's thoughts turn to the matter of succession? Or 2005, forty years later after he became in 1965, when surely this must have been a concern, and health issues already coming up? Or 2011, forty six years from the date of the Plaintiff's claimed nass? Of these, the Plaintiff's is the least likely, the most implausible scenario”, the court opined, highlighting the four occasions where 'nass' was conferred on Syedna Saifuddin.The court held that Fakhruddin's suit failed on all counts of likelihood, probability, balance, preponderance, prudence.In its 226-page judgment dismissing the suit, the court highlighted that this case revolved around the issue of control, not merely over indiscernible wealth but over the entire Dawoodi Bohra faith and way of life. The court emphasized that the suit is a civil claim, distinct from matters of faith, and it is deciding not who should more appropriately be the Dai, but merely who proved, according to civil law, his claim of having properly appointed the 53rd Dai. "The claim is undoubtedly a civil claim, one that agitates a civil right. That this may have wider consequences to the faith is immaterial."The caseFakhruddin's (plaintiff) father Khuzaima Qutbuddin's (original plaintiff) case rested on the assertion that he was appointed as the “Mansoos” or would-be 53rd Dai through a 'nass' by the 52nd Dai on December 10, 1965, during a private meeting between the two. This alleged appointment was kept confidential until after the 52nd Dai's demise on January 17, 2014. After Qutbuddin's death, his son Fakhruddin took over, claiming that Qutbuddin conferred the 'nass' on him.On the other hand, Syedna Saifuddin (defendant) claimed to have been appointed as the would-be 53rd Dai on multiple occasions, including in 1969, 2005, and twice in 2011. He argued that a 'nass' could be freely alterable and revocable, and the last 'nass' before the incumbent Dai's passing would supersede all previous appointments.Plaintiff's prayersDeclaration that Fakhruddin's father Qutbuddin was appointed as the 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq and Fakhruddin was duly and validly appointed as the 54th Dai-al Mutlaq of the Dawoodi Bohra Community. Declaration that Qutbuddin, as the 53rd Dai al-Mutlaq, and Fakhruddin, as the 54th Dai al-Mutlaq, were entitled to administer, control, and manage all properties and assets of the Dawoodi Bohra Community.Directions to Syedna Saifuddin to hand over possession of various movable properties taken by him upon the death of the 52nd Dai. Permanent injunction allowing Fakhruddin to enter and use Saify Mahal in Malabar (the Dai's residence), Saifee Masjid, Raudat Tahera, and other Dawoodi Bohra community properties for conducting audiences, prayers, sermons, etc.Permanent injunction preventing Syedna Saifuddin from interfering with Fakhruddin's rights over community wakfs, trusts, and other assets. Direction to Syedna Saifuddin to furnish complete particulars of assets/properties of the office of Dai al-Mutlaq and database of community members to Fakhruddin.VerdictOn burden of proofThe court emphasized that the burden rested on Fakhruddin (plaintiff) to prove the existence, validity and irrevocability of the alleged 'nass' (designation of a successor) conferred upon his father Khuzaima Qutbuddin. Syedna Saifuddin (defendant), while presenting an affirmative case, was not required to prove anything conclusively but could succeed by disproving Fakhruddin's claims.On maintainabilityThe court dismissed preliminary objections raised by Syedna Saifuddin (Defendant) regarding the jurisdiction of the court and the nature of the suit. The court affirmed that the dispute was a civil matter concerning the appointment of the Dai al-Mutlaq and did not involve religious rites or ceremonies....

Least Plausible For Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin To Think Of Appointing Successor Immediately After Assuming Office In 1965: Bombay High Court

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags