Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1861

Unread post by rational_guy » Sun Aug 23, 2015 12:27 am

Syedna Khuzaima Qutbuddin TUS will again lead evidence on Monday and Tuesday, 24th and 25th August 2015 in the High Court

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1862

Unread post by Al-Noor » Sun Aug 23, 2015 6:36 am

when is muffy coming to court?

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1863

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:54 pm

Al-Noor wrote:when is muffy coming to court?
As per newspaper reports Muffy's cross examination will start from Monday 24.08.2015.

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1864

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Sun Aug 23, 2015 5:07 pm

ghulam muhammed wrote:
Al-Noor wrote:when is muffy coming to court?
As per newspaper reports Muffy's cross examination will start from Monday 24.08.2015.
It seems unlikely that Muffy will attend court on 24th August as according to kothar sponsored zeninfosys website he is still in Mombasa. He will continue with this delay tactics and reap in as much moolah as possible before the court issues any directions.

AgnosticIndian
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 6:10 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1865

Unread post by AgnosticIndian » Sun Aug 23, 2015 10:26 pm

Wonder how Muffy will answer without having written scripts in front of him to read out. There will be good amount of fumbling. Lot of I don't remember. Wish we could get video recording

kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1866

Unread post by kimanumanu » Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:18 am

Anyone confirm who is going to be cross-examined? Fatemi Dawat website says it is SKQ but the newspaper article said SMS.

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1867

Unread post by rational_guy » Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:51 pm

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?i ... &ed_page=6

Khuzaima Qutbuddin, uncle of incumbent 53rd Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin, on Monday informed the Bombay High Court that the defendant (Saifuddin) and his brothers used to be his pupils in matters of spiritual guidance and learning.
Qutbuddin is being cross-examined in the HC in a suit filed by him, saying that he be declared as the rightful 53rd Syedna.
However, he did not give out the exact period when Saifuddin and his brothers were his pupils, but added that they would come to him from the time when the 51st dai was there.
When asked whether sajda (physical prostration) could be offered to a person other than a dai, Qutbuddin said, “Sajda is offered only to a dai or the mansoos or to a person known as one who will succeed the dai.”
“I remember my sisters would sometimes do so (offer him sajda). I do not remember if my brothers did it,” he added, saying that many people of higher spiritual learning who knew that he was made the mansoos offered him the sajda.
Qutbuddin had, in an earlier hearing, said the 52nd Syedna had appointed him as the mazoon and given a sermon, calling him a beloved son. This, Qutbuddin added, carried the meaning that he was his successor.
In June 2011, Saifuddin was nominated successor, according to a press statement from the community. Qutbuddin had publicly challenged the succession first time after the death of Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin on January 17, 2014.
Qutbuddin claimed that he did not challenge the “false claims” made by Saifuddin until now because he (Qutbuddin) had been asked to maintain his appointment in confidence by Syedna Burhanuddin and was waiting for the late leader to get well to take up the issue with him.
The cross-examination will continue on Tuesday.
Published Date: Aug 25, 2015

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1868

Unread post by rational_guy » Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:53 pm

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/City ... 657792.cms

Nephew was my student, Syedna’s uncle tells HC

MUMBAI: The uncle of Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin on Monday told Bombay high court that at one point of time his nephew along with his brothers used to come to him for spiritual guidance and learning.

Qutbuddin (74) was answering questions posed by Saifuddin's advocate, Iqbal Chagla, during his cross-examination in a suit filed by him to be declared the "rightful" spiritual head of the Dawoodi Bohras. Saifuddin succeeded his father the 52nd Syedna, Mohammed Burhanuddin, after his death. Qutbuddin, who is Burhanuddin's half-brother, challenged his nephew's claim as the 53rd Dai.

Chagla asked Qutbuddin whether or not Saifuddin and his brothers were his pupils in matters of "spiritual guidance ". "Not regularly. But only once in a while," replied Qutbuddin. Asked how often, he replied, "They were regular during one period of time but not later."

He said Burhanuddin sent his sons to him and this was for about ten years during his reign. While he could not remember the exact period they were his pupils, Qutbuddin added that that they came to him from the time of his father, the 51st Dai. Qutbuddin also replied that "if not all then many" persons of higher spiritual value knew he was made the mansoos (successor) and even offered him sajda (prostration). He said even Saifuddin and his brothers used to offer him sajda. The cross-examination will continue on Tuesday.

AgnosticIndian
Posts: 446
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 6:10 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1869

Unread post by AgnosticIndian » Tue Aug 25, 2015 8:42 am

Even KQ can't remember a few things. Ghaib na jankar theory is fast going out of the window

hamhyd
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 3:09 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1870

Unread post by hamhyd » Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:24 am

AgnosticIndian wrote:Even KQ can't remember a few things. Ghaib na jankar theory is fast going out of the window
nobody is gahib na jankar if sts have any ilam of gahib then things would have been better atleast he would have done the 2 nass

fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1871

Unread post by fayyaaz » Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:51 am

Gahyb na jaankaar, like Allah, must keep ghayb to himself. If not, what would be the point of ghayb being ghayb? Silly, isn't it?

If one claims to be ghayb no jaankaar, then there is no way to prove or disprove the claim. If your are so cussed about the issue, prove or disprove that Allah is ghayb na jaankaar. I know that in the Quran He claims to be one! :lol:

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1872

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Tue Aug 25, 2015 4:32 pm

Court Hearings on 24th & 25th August

22 August 2015

Syedna Khuzaima Qutbuddin TUS, the Plaintiff in the Declaratory Suit filed in the Bombay High Court, will appear in the Honorable High Court for his testimony on the 24th and 25th of August 2015 inshaallah.

Mumineen are advised to in these days to beseech prayers, doa and do tasbeeh.

Mumineen should recite doa Nasr wal Mahaba and tasbeehs of hasbunallah wa ni’mal wakeel, salawaat, panjetan paak naam SA, Syedna Qutbuddin Shaheed RA, Syedna Taher Saifuddin RA and Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin RA.

As stated earlier in Sijill 59, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has asked that both parties issue a statement asking the community to maintain calm during the proceeding of the trial. Mumineen are hereby requested to maintain calm during the proceeding of the trial.

http://www.fatemidawat.com/news/announc ... ugust.html

kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1873

Unread post by kimanumanu » Tue Aug 25, 2015 5:25 pm

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 672477.cms

‘Late Syedna was less alert in sunset years’
Rosy Sequeira,TNN | Aug 26, 2015, 01.00 AM IST
MUMBAI: In the last years of his life, late Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin was not as mentally alert as he used to be, his half-brother told Bombay High Court on Tuesday.

Khuzaima Qutbuddin (74) was being cross-examined during the trial before Justice Gautam Patel in a suit filed by him to be declared the spiritual head of the Dawood Bohras. Burhanuddin died on January 17, 2014, at the age of 102.

His second son, Mufaddal Saifuddin, succeeded him as the 53rd Dai. When senior advocate Iqbal Chagla, appearing for Saifuddin, asked whether Burhanuddin was in full control of his mental and physical faculties till the end, Qutbuddin answered, "I felt and believed that his health had deteriorated during the last two-and-a-half-years of his life." He said Burhanuddin was "unable to function and carry out his activities as before."

Truth-Prevails
Posts: 146
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:02 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1874

Unread post by Truth-Prevails » Tue Aug 25, 2015 9:29 pm

DNA MUMBAI

Other side was once disrespectful to me, Qutbuddin tells high court
by Mustafa Plumber @plumbermushi

Khuzaima Qutbuddin, challenger to the 53rd Syedna post, on Tuesday informed the Bombay high court that the late 52nd Dai, Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin, had admonished his eldest (the constituted attorney and brother of 53rd Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin) and youngest sons for not showing respect to him (Qutbuddin).

Qutbuddin is being cross-examined in the HC in a suit filed by him, saying that he be declared as the rightful 53rd Syedna. “The eldest son Qaidjoher Ezzuddin and youngest son Ammar Jamaluddin were admonished by the late Syedna, but their attitude towards me did not change,” he said.

Qutbuddin also said that since 1987 Saifuddin and his brothers started to implement a “devious scheme” to try and malign him, by telling many people not to offer sajda (physical prostration) to him and not to address him as maula. When asked whether due to these alleged attempts, people stopped offering sajda to him, he added, “Some of them did, they were fearful on account of the actions of the defendant and his brothers.”

Qutbuddin was also asked whether according to him the late 52nd DAI was in sound mind until he passed away. “My observation was that he was not active physically as well as mentally as he once used to be,” he said on condition of anonymity.
Published Date: Aug 26, 2015


http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?i ... &ed_page=5

kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1875

Unread post by kimanumanu » Wed Aug 26, 2015 1:34 pm

Truth-Prevails wrote: Qutbuddin was also asked whether according to him the late 52nd DAI was in sound mind until he passed away. “My observation was that he was not active physically as well as mentally as he once used to be,” he said on condition of anonymity.
Is that just lazy journalism? How can he be anonymous when he is being cross-examined in court?

S. Insaf
Posts: 1494
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 4:01 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1876

Unread post by S. Insaf » Sat Aug 29, 2015 11:41 am

When is the next date of hearing?

kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1877

Unread post by kimanumanu » Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:10 pm

Next Date:- 06/10/2015 Stage:- FOR CROSS EXAMINATION
Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL
Last Date:- 25/08/2015 Stage:- FOR CROSS EXAMINATION
Last Coram:- HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G.S. PATEL

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1878

Unread post by Al-Noor » Sat Aug 29, 2015 3:27 pm

Do they have any deadline to finish up this matter?

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1879

Unread post by rational_guy » Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:14 pm

Source: Fatemidawatlegal.com

Bombay High Court Declaratory Suit 24th & 25th August 2015
Posted on August 30, 2015
The cross-examination of the Plaintiff (Syedna Khuzaima QutbuddinTUS) in the Suit filed by him in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court continued for two days on the 24th and 25th of August 2015 at 12:00pm in the historic courtroom No. 46, presided by Hon’ble Justice Gautam Patel.

The Plaintiff was cross-examined by the Defendant’s (Shehzada Mufaddal Saifuddin) Senior Counsel Mr. Iqbal Chagla.

Plaintiff was asked several questions. These included the following:



Mr. Chagla asked whether it was correct that Sajda, as a mark of respect, can be offered to persons other than the Dai or the Mansoos. The Plaintiff replied emphatically that Sajda can only be “offered to the Dai or the Mansoos or to a person who is known as one who will succeed the Dai.”
Mr. Chagla asked if all persons of higher spiritual learning knew that the Plaintiff was made the Mansoos, to which the Plaintiff replied that many persons of higher spiritual learning did know. On being asked if the Plaintiff was suggesting that those persons of higher spiritual learning who knew that the Plaintiff had been made the Mansoos offered Sajda to him, the Plaintiff said that many of them did. The Plaintiff added that he was offered Sajda even during the time of the 51st Dai by persons of higher spiritual learning, including Miyasaheb Fidahussain Yamani, who was a learned scholar and was placed first in the tarteeb (hierarchy), used to offer him Sajda. He would also bring his family members to Plaintiff and get them to offer sajda.

Mr. Chagla then asked how many of the Plaintiff’s brother’s offered Sajda to him, to which the Plaintiff replied that they would use the word “Sajda” in their written communications to him. He added that all the sons of the 52nd Dai offered Sajda to him.

Mr. Chagla then asked if the Defendant and his brothers were the Plaintiff’s pupils in matters of spiritual guidance and learning, to which the Plaintiff replied that they were, but not regularly. When asked further how often the Defendant and his brothers were his pupils, the Plaintiff replied that they were regular during one period but not thereafter, for about 10 years after the 52nd Dai assumed office. The Plaintiff said that it was the 52nd Dai who sent his sons to the Plaintiff.

When asked for how long the 52nd Dai sent his sons to the Plaintiff for spiritual instruction, the Plaintiff replied that he did not remember the exact periods. The Plaintiff added that the Defendant and his elder brother used to come to him as pupils from the time of the 51st Dai.

Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff as stated in his Affidavit of Evidence, in what way did he enjoy the 52nd Dai’s full confidence till his passing away. The Plaintiff replied that the 52nd Dai made him the Mazoon and the Mansoos and the Plaintiff was his Mazoon and Mansoos for 50 years till he passed away. The Plaintiff said that in itself was enough to establish the confidence that the 52nd Dai had in him.

Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff if the 52nd Dai was in full control of his faculties till he passed away. The Plaintiff replied that the health of the 52nd Dai was not good for the last two and half years of his life.

Mr. Chagla then repeated his question by asking if the 52nd Dai was in full control of his mental and physical faculties till he passed away. The Plaintiff responded that he felt and believed that the health of the 52nd Dai had deteriorated greatly during the last two and half years of his life.

Mr. Chagla further asked if the Plaintiff was referring to only the physical health or mental health of the 52nd Dai as well. The Plaintiff replied that the 52nd Dai was not able to function and carry out his activities as before. Mr. Chagla asked if according to the Plaintiff the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing. The Plaintiff responded that he observed that the 52nd Dai was not either physically or mentally active as he once was.

Then Mr. Chagla asked if the Plaintiff agreed that the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing away. The Plaintiff asked Mr. Chagla to clarify what he meant by “of sound mind”. To that Mr. Chagla asked if the 52nd Dai was insane. The Plaintiff emphatically said “No. I would not say that.”
Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff if the 52nd Dai was capable of taking decisions on his own till his passing away. The Plaintiff said that he was not sure.

On being further asked what his reasons were for doubting the 52nd Dai’s capacity to take independent decisions, the Plaintiff said that whenever he went to the Syedna in the last two and half years of his life he noticed a significant difference in him. On being asked how frequently he visited the 52nd Dai in those last two and a half years, the Plaintiff said that during this period he would visit him often whenever the 52nd Dai was in Mumbai.

Mr. Chagla showed the Plaintiff his Affidavit of Evidence in which the Plaintiff has said that the Defendant and his brothers “started to implement a devious scheme to try and malign the Plaintiff. Mr. Chagla asked in what way they did this. The Plaintiff said that they told people to stop paying respects to him and stop addressing the Plaintiff as “Maula” and not offer him “Sajda”. When asked whether people actually stopped paying respects to him as before as a result of this, the Plaintiff answered that some people did while some defied the Defendant and continued addressing him as “Maula” and would offer “Sajda”. The Plaintiff also said that the Defendant and his brothers told people that if they addressed the Plaintiff as “Maula” they would not be allowed to go to the Syedna (52nd Dai). On being questioned as to when all this started, the Plaintiff replied that it was sometime after 1987.

Mr. Chagla asked whether the Plaintiff would agree that the 52nd Dai was in complete possession of his physical and mental faculties for the period before the last two and half years of his life? The Plaintiff replied that he showed the usual signs of slowing down that come with age. When asked whether this impaired his mental faculties, the Plaintiff responded that he did not have the same mental alertness as before.

When asked whether the Defendant and his brothers held any position in Daawat (the community), the Plaintiff replied that the Defendant and his elder brother were among the Ameer ul-Jamea (the rectors of Jamea Saifiyah academy in Surat). When asked about the Defendant’s other brothers, the Plaintiff replied that they all were given some Daawat responsibility.

The Plaintiff was shown his Affdavit of Evidence in which he has said that the 52nd Dai “actually admonished some of his sons who were not showing the respect they ought to have shown” to the Plaintiff. Mr. Chagla asked which sons was he referring to specifically? The Plaintiff replied that he was referring to the 52nd Dai’s eldest son, Qaid Johar Izzuddin and his younger son Ammar Jamaluddin. When Mr. Chagla further asked whether they changed their attitude to the Plaintiff because of what the 52nd Dai said to them, the Plaintiff replied saying he did not think so.

The cross-examination will continue on the 6th and 7th of October.

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1880

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Sun Aug 30, 2015 7:08 pm

rational_guy wrote:Mr. Chagla further asked if the Plaintiff was referring to only the physical health or mental health of the 52nd Dai as well. The Plaintiff replied that the 52nd Dai was not able to function and carry out his activities as before. Mr. Chagla asked if according to the Plaintiff the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing. The Plaintiff responded that he observed that the 52nd Dai was not either physically or mentally active as he once was.
SKQ cannot give a specific answer to this question as otherwise the entire claim of the Dai's infallibility would collapse like a pack of cards !

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1881

Unread post by Al-Noor » Mon Aug 31, 2015 1:09 pm

yes correct and this is the sole reason for not following KQ as well, because at certain level is also lying and trying to hide truth....these guys are not ready to give away godlike status for their own maabud which they have created by their own hand. Nauzobillah. they should give up false holy claims and come back to originality of faith.

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1882

Unread post by rational_guy » Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:41 am

rational_guy wrote:Source: Fatemidawatlegal.com

Bombay High Court Declaratory Suit 24th & 25th August 2015
Posted on August 30, 2015
The cross-examination of the Plaintiff (Syedna Khuzaima QutbuddinTUS) in the Suit filed by him in the Hon’ble Bombay High Court continued for two days on the 24th and 25th of August 2015 at 12:00pm in the historic courtroom No. 46, presided by Hon’ble Justice Gautam Patel.

The Plaintiff was cross-examined by the Defendant’s (Shehzada Mufaddal Saifuddin) Senior Counsel Mr. Iqbal Chagla.

Plaintiff was asked several questions. These included the following:



Mr. Chagla asked whether it was correct that Sajda, as a mark of respect, can be offered to persons other than the Dai or the Mansoos. The Plaintiff replied emphatically that Sajda can only be “offered to the Dai or the Mansoos or to a person who is known as one who will succeed the Dai.”
Mr. Chagla asked if all persons of higher spiritual learning knew that the Plaintiff was made the Mansoos, to which the Plaintiff replied that many persons of higher spiritual learning did know. On being asked if the Plaintiff was suggesting that those persons of higher spiritual learning who knew that the Plaintiff had been made the Mansoos offered Sajda to him, the Plaintiff said that many of them did. The Plaintiff added that he was offered Sajda even during the time of the 51st Dai by persons of higher spiritual learning, including Miyasaheb Fidahussain Yamani, who was a learned scholar and was placed first in the tarteeb (hierarchy), used to offer him Sajda. He would also bring his family members to Plaintiff and get them to offer sajda.

Mr. Chagla then asked how many of the Plaintiff’s brother’s offered Sajda to him, to which the Plaintiff replied that they would use the word “Sajda” in their written communications to him. He added that all the sons of the 52nd Dai offered Sajda to him.

Mr. Chagla then asked if the Defendant and his brothers were the Plaintiff’s pupils in matters of spiritual guidance and learning, to which the Plaintiff replied that they were, but not regularly. When asked further how often the Defendant and his brothers were his pupils, the Plaintiff replied that they were regular during one period but not thereafter, for about 10 years after the 52nd Dai assumed office. The Plaintiff said that it was the 52nd Dai who sent his sons to the Plaintiff.

When asked for how long the 52nd Dai sent his sons to the Plaintiff for spiritual instruction, the Plaintiff replied that he did not remember the exact periods. The Plaintiff added that the Defendant and his elder brother used to come to him as pupils from the time of the 51st Dai.

Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff as stated in his Affidavit of Evidence, in what way did he enjoy the 52nd Dai’s full confidence till his passing away. The Plaintiff replied that the 52nd Dai made him the Mazoon and the Mansoos and the Plaintiff was his Mazoon and Mansoos for 50 years till he passed away. The Plaintiff said that in itself was enough to establish the confidence that the 52nd Dai had in him.

Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff if the 52nd Dai was in full control of his faculties till he passed away. The Plaintiff replied that the health of the 52nd Dai was not good for the last two and half years of his life.

Mr. Chagla then repeated his question by asking if the 52nd Dai was in full control of his mental and physical faculties till he passed away. The Plaintiff responded that he felt and believed that the health of the 52nd Dai had deteriorated greatly during the last two and half years of his life.

Mr. Chagla further asked if the Plaintiff was referring to only the physical health or mental health of the 52nd Dai as well. The Plaintiff replied that the 52nd Dai was not able to function and carry out his activities as before. Mr. Chagla asked if according to the Plaintiff the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing. The Plaintiff responded that he observed that the 52nd Dai was not either physically or mentally active as he once was.

Then Mr. Chagla asked if the Plaintiff agreed that the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing away. The Plaintiff asked Mr. Chagla to clarify what he meant by “of sound mind”. To that Mr. Chagla asked if the 52nd Dai was insane. The Plaintiff emphatically said “No. I would not say that.
Mr. Chagla asked the Plaintiff if the 52nd Dai was capable of taking decisions on his own till his passing away. The Plaintiff said that he was not sure.

On being further asked what his reasons were for doubting the 52nd Dai’s capacity to take independent decisions, the Plaintiff said that whenever he went to the Syedna in the last two and half years of his life he noticed a significant difference in him. On being asked how frequently he visited the 52nd Dai in those last two and a half years, the Plaintiff said that during this period he would visit him often whenever the 52nd Dai was in Mumbai.

Mr. Chagla showed the Plaintiff his Affidavit of Evidence in which the Plaintiff has said that the Defendant and his brothers “started to implement a devious scheme to try and malign the Plaintiff. Mr. Chagla asked in what way they did this. The Plaintiff said that they told people to stop paying respects to him and stop addressing the Plaintiff as “Maula” and not offer him “Sajda”. When asked whether people actually stopped paying respects to him as before as a result of this, the Plaintiff answered that some people did while some defied the Defendant and continued addressing him as “Maula” and would offer “Sajda”. The Plaintiff also said that the Defendant and his brothers told people that if they addressed the Plaintiff as “Maula” they would not be allowed to go to the Syedna (52nd Dai). On being questioned as to when all this started, the Plaintiff replied that it was sometime after 1987.

Mr. Chagla asked whether the Plaintiff would agree that the 52nd Dai was in complete possession of his physical and mental faculties for the period before the last two and half years of his life? The Plaintiff replied that he showed the usual signs of slowing down that come with age. When asked whether this impaired his mental faculties, the Plaintiff responded that he did not have the same mental alertness as before.

When asked whether the Defendant and his brothers held any position in Daawat (the community), the Plaintiff replied that the Defendant and his elder brother were among the Ameer ul-Jamea (the rectors of Jamea Saifiyah academy in Surat). When asked about the Defendant’s other brothers, the Plaintiff replied that they all were given some Daawat responsibility.

The Plaintiff was shown his Affdavit of Evidence in which he has said that the 52nd Dai “actually admonished some of his sons who were not showing the respect they ought to have shown” to the Plaintiff. Mr. Chagla asked which sons was he referring to specifically? The Plaintiff replied that he was referring to the 52nd Dai’s eldest son, Qaid Johar Izzuddin and his younger son Ammar Jamaluddin. When Mr. Chagla further asked whether they changed their attitude to the Plaintiff because of what the 52nd Dai said to them, the Plaintiff replied saying he did not think so.

The cross-examination will continue on the 6th and 7th of October.

I want to point out here, that as per instructions Shehzada Mufaddal Saifuddin and his legal team his lawyer Mr. Chagla asked Syedna Khuzaima Qutbuddin TUS whether Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin is insane. This is ample proof that Mufaddal bhaisaheb and his brothers and his coterie did not really respect Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin.

Awaiting twisted replies from James and his alike.

Biradar
Posts: 903
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1883

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Sep 01, 2015 12:17 pm

The key question is: was SMB in control of his own actions after the brain stroke? The answer, obviously, is NO. It does not mean that he was insane (which is a really pathetic question for Dawedar Mr. Muffadul Saifuddin's (DMMS) lawyer to ask). People get old. Even the prophet got old, and often during times of sickness he delegated others to lead namaaz on his behalf. The two major things which happened with SMB was that (a) the lost control of the dawaat affairs even when he was alert and active (b) after the brain stroke he was manipulated to such an extent that he was just a puppet for the advancement of DMMS's goals.

Now, before Muffy vultures jump on me, I want to point out that often even the Imams were unable to control their courts and ministers. For example, Imam Mustansir's vazir was so powerful and created so many obstacles in obtaining an audience with the Imam, that even a man of the stature of S. Moayyad Shirazi was frustrated and unable to see the Imam. Further, the situation had so deteriorated that it took the military intervention of Maulana Badar al-Jamali to rescue the empire from near collapse. Hence, it is not at all surprising that the children and brothers of SMB took control of dawaat affairs, mainly to turn it into their own personal kitty.

I have elaborated on this many, many times, and it seems tiring and pointless to repeat the same old things. This court case is a farce, with no outcome in sight. The judge will rule in favor of More-la Muffy as otherwise the baboon followers of this Fironi Leader will go on a murderous spree of mayhem and violence. Also, More-la Muffy has already greased the palms of even the Prime Minister. In this situation, how can one expect any justice from the Indian court system? It is impossible. A quixotic task, like titillating at windmills.

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1884

Unread post by Al-Noor » Tue Sep 01, 2015 3:00 pm

Biradar wrote:
I have elaborated on this many, many times, and it seems tiring and pointless to repeat the same old things. This court case is a farce, with no outcome in sight. The judge will rule in favor of More-la Muffy as otherwise the baboon followers of this Fironi Leader will go on a murderous spree of mayhem and violence. Also, More-la Muffy has already greased the palms of even the Prime Minister. In this situation, how can one expect any justice from the Indian court system? It is impossible. A quixotic task, like titillating at windmills.
So why did your leader chose to go Indian court? money wasted on lawyers would have been used for some other good cause?

apart from worldly properties what else is gain from this case? any how muffy gundas will always try to beat and insult KQ followers in rozas even if they wiin the case, muffy is chor and his gundas are shameless animals.

Biradar
Posts: 903
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1885

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Sep 01, 2015 6:23 pm

Al-Noor wrote:
Biradar wrote:
I have elaborated on this many, many times, and it seems tiring and pointless to repeat the same old things. This court case is a farce, with no outcome in sight. The judge will rule in favor of More-la Muffy as otherwise the baboon followers of this Fironi Leader will go on a murderous spree of mayhem and violence. Also, More-la Muffy has already greased the palms of even the Prime Minister. In this situation, how can one expect any justice from the Indian court system? It is impossible. A quixotic task, like titillating at windmills.
So why did your leader chose to go Indian court? money wasted on lawyers would have been used for some other good cause?

apart from worldly properties what else is gain from this case? any how muffy gundas will always try to beat and insult KQ followers in rozas even if they wiin the case, muffy is chor and his gundas are shameless animals.
You answered your own question.

dal-chaval-palidu
Posts: 648
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 12:46 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1886

Unread post by dal-chaval-palidu » Wed Sep 02, 2015 12:37 am

It seems like very limited information is coming out of the court case right now. Only what is in the newspapers and from Fatemi Dawat Legal.

Does anyone know the rules of the Indian judicial system? After the case is over, can all the proceedings of the case be made public? Or, is only the judgement, presuming that there is one, made public?

humanbeing
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1887

Unread post by humanbeing » Wed Sep 02, 2015 2:48 am

Then Mr. Chagla asked if the Plaintiff agreed that the 52nd Dai was of sound mind till his passing away. The Plaintiff asked Mr. Chagla to clarify what he meant by “of sound mind”. To that Mr. Chagla asked if the 52nd Dai was insane. The Plaintiff emphatically said “No. I would not say that.”.
Kothar in its informal propaganda would accuse SKQ of calling SMB insane, they will jump and take note of every such question and answer that can be twisted to their awesome marketing and hate mongering tricks.

rational_guy
Posts: 205
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:21 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1888

Unread post by rational_guy » Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:46 am

Al-Noor wrote:
Biradar wrote:
I have elaborated on this many, many times, and it seems tiring and pointless to repeat the same old things. This court case is a farce, with no outcome in sight. The judge will rule in favor of More-la Muffy as otherwise the baboon followers of this Fironi Leader will go on a murderous spree of mayhem and violence. Also, More-la Muffy has already greased the palms of even the Prime Minister. In this situation, how can one expect any justice from the Indian court system? It is impossible. A quixotic task, like titillating at windmills.
So why did your leader chose to go Indian court? money wasted on lawyers would have been used for some other good cause?

apart from worldly properties what else is gain from this case? any how muffy gundas will always try to beat and insult KQ followers in rozas even if they wiin the case, muffy is chor and his gundas are shameless animals.
Syedna Dawood bin Qutubshah (RA), went to Akbar's court to prove that he is the true Dai. Similarly, Syedna Khuzaima Qutbuddin (TUS) has gone to the bombay high court to prove that he is the true Dai.

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1889

Unread post by Al-Noor » Wed Sep 02, 2015 12:30 pm

hhhmm good one, lets see what Indian court does about it.

alivasan
Posts: 394
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 9:28 am

Re: Sticky: Dawoodi Bohra's Succession of Dai Case in Mumbai High Court

#1890

Unread post by alivasan » Sun Sep 06, 2015 11:28 am

I have my doubts on judiciary system. I had attended many affluent parsi bawas cases heard by gs patel and find him very liberal, soft cornered any muffy goonda will just make mockery of whole system pretending to be remaining in law. This [DELETED] should should get kicked [DELETED] start in court not only on self proclaiming so called dai but start from very beginning on what made his forefathers leave allah fearing leading community and led life of money rot