A slice of history

Dina Wadia daughter of Jinnah and Nusli Wadia objected Pakistan’s move to make his house as “house of consul-general”. Will they agree now?

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/FD30Df03.html

The house that Jinnah built
By Tarini Unnikrishnan

NEW DELHI - Far from the madding crowd of the Indian elections, away from the high-profile glare of the twin core issues of Kashmir and cross-border terrorism that more often than not divide India and Pakistan, a beautiful old house in Mumbai’s plush Malabar Hill area patiently waits for the hammer of history to write yet another chapter in the relationship of the two nations.

This is the house that Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the man who painstakingly founded a brand new nation in 1947 called Pakistan, built barely 11 years earlier, when he returned from London to Bombay (as Mumbai was known then) to take charge of the Muslim League.

Now, Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf wants India to “give” Pakistan the house as an outright gift, or perhaps “lease” it in perpetuity, as a symbol of New Delhi’s faith in the new peace initiative with Islamabad.

The subject is said to have come up already twice this year, the first time when Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Musharraf’s delegations met in January in Islamabad. Then in March, on the margins of a one-day international cricket match between India and Pakistan in Lahore, the matter was raised with the visiting Indian National Security Advisor, Brajesh Mishra, by his Pakistani host and counterpart, secretary of the National Security Council, Tariq Aziz.

In January, in drafting the most important document between the two nations ever, a promissory note that would ultimately take into account the core concerns of both nations - Islamabad would promise to end violence and hostility in Kashmir in exchange for talks on the “disputed” state - Pakistani officials interwove a plea for the Jinnah property.

It would, they said, be like the icing on the cake. The house that Jinnah built in Mumbai, the two-and-a-half acre property in which he spent the happiest years of his life with his Parsi wife Ruttie and their only daughter Dina, a house which overlooks the Arabian Sea - on the other side was Karachi, the city to which Jinnah would permanently emigrate after 1947 - should be “given” to Pakistan as the residence of Pakistan’s consul-general.

“Its not only a house made of brick and mortar,” one Pakistani diplomat said. “It’s a slice of our history. And it belongs to us.”

Clearly, Jinnah’s home has immense historical significance. It was here that the Qaid-e-Azam, Pakistan’s dearly-remembered founding father, held talks with Mahatma Gandhi, India’s own iconic leader and statesman, in September 1944, perhaps over the fate of their still-undivided nation. Ironically, the man in the loincloth (Gandhi) would resist the bifurcation of India until the day it happened, in 1947, while the man in the monocle wouldn’t stop fighting for separation. But both were destined to die soon, within nine months of each other, in January and September 1948, respectively.

It was here, too, that Jinnah held talks with two other key Indian leaders, ideologically disparate but united in their vision of a free India, namely Subhas Chandra Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru. Bose thought little of allying with the Germans and the Japanese if they could throw out the British from India. Nehru, on the other hand, believed Lord Mountbatten would play by the English code of “fairness” when he presided over the breakup of the sub-continent. All three leaders met in Jinnah’s house on August 15, 1946, exactly a year before their various trysts with destiny.

It wasn’t as if over the years, the Pakistani side said, New Delhi had never promised to hand over the property or that the subject did not command political consensus in India. Indeed, when Vajpayee visited Pakistan in his earlier reincarnation as foreign minister in 1978, he had pointed out that the Jinnah house would be “returned” once the British consul-general evacuated the property (that happened in 1982). In 1981, foreign minister P V Narasimha Rao of the Congress also told the Lok Sabha, India’s lower house of parliament, that India had promised to do right by Pakistan, and so the Jinnah house would go back to the Pakistani people. Unfortunately, though, nothing has come of it so far.

To a nation that still sets much sentimental store on the past, the Pakistanis indicated, to a people still largely governed by emotion, that the return of the 70-year-old property in 2004 would be the biggest confidence-building measure yet between the two sides. Almost like coming home.

The Indians responded with a deafening silence. On the eve of the January summit, perhaps anticipating such a request, New Delhi announced that the property, now commandeered by its Foreign Office, would house a new South Asian cultural center.

By March, when Tariq Aziz was to make a second request for the property with Brajesh Mishra, New Delhi had formalized its own request. Let Pakistan reopen the Indian consulate in Karachi that had been shut since rioters broke into it in 1994. India’s high commissioner to Pakistan, Shiv Shanker Menon, even travelled to Karachi in early February to take a look at the vandalized property and sent back photos of the same.

An unwritten quid pro quo has come into play: Pakistan would reopen India’s Karachi consulate if New Delhi gave the Jinnah house to Islamabad. Pakistani diplomats said they would now take this “link” to the senior official for the six-item composite dialogue that will take place in July between the two sides.

By July, the two foreign secretaries will have already met and begun a revivified discussion on Kashmir - the first time since 1998. A month later in August, the two foreign ministers are due to get together to politically underwrite the discussions of their bureaucracies. If the talks go well, Pakistani diplomats say, there is no reason why India would willfully refuse Islamabad something it so desperately wanted.

“We’ve been waiting since the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan 57 years ago for India to give it to us,” one diplomat said, adding, “we’ll wait another three months to discuss it again. We hope New Delhi will at last listen to this cry from our heart.”

As the heat and dust of the Indian election takes its toll across the countryside, everything else moves backstage. But once the hurly-burly’s done by mid-May, both nations will again have the opportunity to lay the past to rest. If Jinnah’s solitary manor helps them do that, it will have played the last chapter in their tumultuous history.

Tarini Unnikrishnan is based in New Delhi, India, and has been writing on foreign affairs for the past 10 years.

How unfair! i think it would serve as the perfect consular general!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Enforcer: *
How unfair! i think it would serve as the perfect consular general!
[/QUOTE]

Who has more right? Jinnah's immediate family or Pakistan or Indian government or the state (Maharashtra) government. Let the court decide...

I think by law it should be returned to the family, but Pakistan should buy them from them if that happens.

I didnt happen in case of Jinnah home in London. Pakistani diplomate said Pakistan cant buy everything that was used by Jinnah.
This property in London has a plaque by english heritage, and owned by a Pakistani who somehow want to cash that and asking for almost twice the normal price.

normal buyer wouldnt buy cause of this price tag and Pakistan govt is not buying it.

I could have bought it myself but cant afford it at the moment.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by imran dhanji: *

Who has more right? Jinnah's immediate family or Pakistan or Indian government or the state (Maharashtra) government. Let the court decide...
[/QUOTE]

Immediate family, someone wjo severed all ties with her father and broke his heart! :(

She can goto hell and suck on a ripe lemmon!

sentimints? what sentimints? 2 1/2 acres of prime land in mumbai just handed over? the court should give it to the wadias who should in turn make it into a national heritage property before shak kills buys it and suks limmins in the front lawn!

i think the indian govt should for once as a goodwill gesture hand it over to the pakistan govt.
theres no point handing it to the Wadias karina.

Haris, to me it sounds like arm twisting by Pakistan. I am sure there must be plenty of properties in Pakistan that are dear to Indians, should we ask for them as a gesture of peace? Legally Jinnah's house belongs to the Wadias as next of kin, unless the govt can prove that it is national heritage. But even then I doubt the public would ever approve of donating such a big property. It could be of immense cultural value, aka Shakespeares house, because of all the historical meetings Jinnah had with other Congress leaders.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by karina: *
Haris, to me it sounds like arm twisting by Pakistan. I am sure there must be plenty of properties in Pakistan that are dear to Indians, should we ask for them as a gesture of peace? Legally Jinnah's house belongs to the Wadias as next of kin, unless the govt can prove that it is national heritage. But even then I doubt the public would ever approve of donating such a big property. It could be of immense cultural value, aka Shakespeares house, because of all the historical meetings Jinnah had with other Congress leaders.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah thats why they tired to himulate him in simla right! Dont give me that!

Even Neru-Gi said it, That man was stubborn, rigid but he knew he was right!

Mr Jinnah belongs to Pakistan, afterall india tried tooverwhelme him politically again and again but failed. Hmm I wonder why?

Jinnah wrtoe his will quite a few years before India was partitioned. I think it was sometime around 1940-42. Dina is of course the most likely to have gotten the propoety but I dont know if he revised his will after she married a Parsi but it would be interesting to know. If Jinnah left it to Pakistan and if the Indian PM promised it to Pakistan, then I suppose we have a good case.

Jinnah was a great leader in Pakistan, but like many others, he was a refugee who migrated to Pakistan/ India in 1947. I think the legal status of whatever was done with the rest of 'evacuee property' in Pakistan/ India is applicable in this case as well.

If the evacuee had living inheritors in that country, the property rightfully belongs to them, else, to the respective governments. Pakistan hence probably has no 'legal' rights on the property.

The GOI, I think, as a goodwill measure should lease or sell it out at market rates.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *
Jinnah wrtoe his will quite a few years before India was partitioned. I think it was sometime around 1940-42. Dina is of course the most likely to have gotten the propoety but I dont know if he revised his will after she married a Parsi but it would be interesting to know. If Jinnah left it to Pakistan and if the Indian PM promised it to Pakistan, then I suppose we have a good case.
[/QUOTE]

i don't think refugees could 'leave' a property to a country. people from both sides just packed up and went, and whatever was left behind was either usurped by someone, or the govt took it.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Enforcer: *

Yeah thats why they tired to himulate him in simla right! Dont give me that!

Even Neru-Gi said it, That man was stubborn, rigid but he knew he was right!

Mr Jinnah belongs to Pakistan, afterall india tried tooverwhelme him politically again and again but failed. Hmm I wonder why?
[/QUOTE]

hain? what does simla have to do with the legal ownership of the property? keep your jinnah, i ain't saying he belongs to us, but pre-partition whatever happened is part of indian history.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by karina: *

i don't think refugees could 'leave' a property to a country. people from both sides just packed up and went, and whatever was left behind was either usurped by someone, or the govt took it.
[/QUOTE]

But was he a refugee? I don't think refugees travel in specially chartered aeroplanes, and dine with viceroys. To say that he was a refugee is absurd. I am not singling you out. I am just trying to correct a perception that Jinnah was a refugee.

To answer your second point, could he have not left the property to Fatima, his beloved sister?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

To answer your second point, could he have not left the property to Fatima, his beloved sister?
[/QUOTE]

i guess he must have died intestate, which is why the indian govt is wrangling with his daughter.

Karina, i agree India may have a lot of valuable and sentimental property in Pakistan but none of it belonged to mahatma Gandhi! that house belongs to QUAIDEAZAM! that means alot to Pakistan. and giving it to pakistan doesnt mean pakistan would take it away from the indian soil and plant it in karachi! it'll remain there with full heritage, historic and cultural values intact.

and guys..i have with me right now the final and last will of QuaideAzam written on 30 May 1939 in Bombay at the Malabar Hill house.
the clause (1) states that it is his last will. (2) makes Fatima Jinnah, Liaqut Ali Khan and one Mohammedali Chaiwala, solicitor his executors and trustees. (3)confirms that all property and shares etc he gifted Fatima Jinnah are her absolute property.
(4)I now hereby bequeath to her (Fatima) my house and all that land with appurtenances, outhouses etc situated at Mount Pleasant Rd. Malabar Hill Bombay, including all the furniture, plates, silver and motor cars in its entirety as it stands absolutely and she can dispose of it in any manner she pleases by will, deed or otherwise.

(5)-(9) direct the executors to pay a certain lifetime sum to Fatima Jinnah, his other sisters and brothers.
(10)i direct my executors to set apart a sum of Rs 200,000 which will at 6% bring an income of Rs 1000 and pay the income to my daughter every month for her life or during her lifetime and after her death the corpus of 2lacs sp set apart to be divided equally betwen her children, male or female, in default of issue the corpus to fall into my residuary estate.

(11)A,B,C and (12) talk of donations to various institutions and universities and colleges.

so with this it stands confirmed that Jinnah DID NOT disown his daughter as per general misconeption. and secondly, he left most and largest portions of his property to fatima Jinnah including the disputed malabar hill house. we can only wonder whether she ramined its owner till her death or after her death who the rightful claimer is...? as for the Wadias, they were given only what is mentioned in (10) so their opinion on the issue doesnt count.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by gesto: *
My friend Athul Rathore's father and his family fled Hyderabad in 1947 following gruesome riots and carnages.His ancestrol house and property(land)are stll there.Can,by any mean,he claim that land and re-gain it?

There are a thousands of Hindus and Sikhs left Pakistan during that worst era of crime and religious hatred.Similarly there are a thousands of muslim who fled India leaving their houses and properties.Can they ever re-gain them?
[/QUOTE]

haha!
the case for acommon middle class or poor man is diff from that of an elite social figure and a poltician. most common men fled their homes in emergencies fearing loss of life or honour. that wasnt the case for the rich who lived in posh secure areas and left theior proprty with complete preperation. they remained the owners of their estates. so Jinnah was the owner of his property leglly as he may have had legal documents while those who cant claim were the unfortunate poor who ofetn fled home s barefoot and obviously had no time to pick up documents. and besides mostly ppl didnt have papers to ancestoral property. the case with figures like Jinnah and Gandhi was hiff. had gandhi or nehru or perhaps even any small time politician of the time had any propertyi pakistan, they would have remained its owners too. but many hindus and sikhs leaving punjab or sindh didnt!
so since Jinnah or later his siter was the owner of that house, pakistan has a right to claim it.

Haris,

Unfotunately, the law does not make a distinction between us commoners and our leaders.

The Begum of Bhopal migrated to Pak. So, by your logic, Bhopal belongs to her inheritors :-)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by cscraja: *
Haris,

Unfotunately, the law does not make a distinction between us commoners and our leaders.

The Begum of Bhopal migrated to Pak. So, by your logic, Bhopal belongs to her inheritors :-)
[/QUOTE]

i take your knowledge of legal matters is limited my friend. and you didnt quite understand my post.
what ive been trying to say is that while the law obviously doesnt differ between the classes the ACTUAL circumstances were diff for the elite and the commoner. the wali of bhopal left bhopal; ofcourse she didnt bring the whole state with her, that was taken by india, but she did sell a lot of her property and DID BRing along a lot of wealth, jewelry, servants and innumerable other valuables which belonged to her. she didnt flee her state in panic. if any commoner who left his place as peacefully as rani of bhopal or Jinnah i'm sure he would have remained the owner of his place or atleats would have received cash proceeds from the sale of his property with help of friends left behind...

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by karina: *

hain? what does simla have to do with the legal ownership of the property? keep your jinnah, i ain't saying he belongs to us, but pre-partition whatever happened is part of indian history.
[/QUOTE]

Read Justice Kyianis papers then you will know what i am talking about!