A 50-year inheritance battle over Rs15,000 crore in royal assets remains unresolved as courts debate succession frameworks. The Pataudi property dispute, dragging through multiple courts for over five decades and three generations, stands as one of India’s clearest examples of inheritance battles outlasting their original litigants.
The Supreme Court last week paused a Madhya Pradesh High Court order for a retrial in the long-running dispute over the former royal estate of Bhopal’s last Nawab, Hamidullah Khan, the great-grandfather of Saif Ali Khan. The stay prevents the case from returning to the trial court, keeping in limbo a battle that began in the early 1970s and now involves at least 16 heirs. At stake: palaces, jewelry, and land collectively valued at over Rs15,000 crore.
The court’s intervention came after appellants argued the High Court’s order was unnecessary. They argued that the dispute rests entirely on a legal question about whether inheritance should be decided under Muslim personal law or the principle of primogeniture, and does not involve any new facts requiring fresh evidence. The next hearing is scheduled for September.
How It Began: The chain of events started in 1962, when Nawab Hamidullah Khan died. The Government of India issued a certificate declaring his eldest daughter, Sajida Sultan, as his sole successor to private properties, following the princely-era tradition of primogeniture. This positioned her descendants, including actor Saif Ali Khan, his sisters Soha Ali Khan and Saba Ali Khan, and their mother Sharmila Tagore, as inheritors.
But other members of the extended family disagreed. Descendants of the Nawab’s brother and younger daughters claimed the property should be divided under Muslim personal law, which provides for equal distribution among heirs. They filed partition suits in 1971 and 1972, setting the stage for decades of litigation.
Key Court Milestones: The dispute’s first major resolution came in 2000, when a trial court ruled in favor of Sajida Sultan’s line, affirming the primogeniture succession. For a time, that verdict seemed decisive.
However, legal ground shifted in 2019 when the Supreme Court ruled that Muslim personal law governs inheritance in such matters, potentially undermining the 2000 decision. Acting on that precedent, the Madhya Pradesh High Court earlier this year set aside the trial court verdict and ordered a fresh trial. The High Court said the matter required adjudication under personal law, despite no request for new evidence.
Verdict Or Void? Royal Riddle Rolls On: The Supreme Court will resume hearings in September, with notices already issued to all parties, including Saif Ali Khan’s family. If the court decides the issue is purely legal, it may deliver a final ruling without sending the case back to trial, potentially ending one of India’s most persistent royal inheritance battles.
But if the court allows a retrial, the fight will almost certainly stretch on for years more. And for the heirs of the late Nawab, that means living with a question mark over their legacy – a reminder that, in some cases, the wheel of justice turns not just slowly, but in circles.
The Supreme Court’s recent stay effectively halts that process, though not the uncertainty.
Why It Keeps Coming Back: Inheritance disputes in India are notorious for their longevity, but several factors make this case exceptional:
Conflicting legal frameworks: The 1962 certificate and princely succession norms clash directly with later rulings emphasizing personal law.
Multiple stakeholders: With 16 known claimants, every development triggers a chain reaction of appeals.
Procedural complexity: Civil procedure rules on remand and evidence ensure that even a narrow legal question can take years to settle.
High-value assets: The estate’s worth fuels persistence; no party is willing to concede.
Generational drift: Over 50 years, many original litigants have died, leaving successors to inherit not just the property claim, but the court case itself.
Heirs In Limbo: While the palaces and assets remain symbols of prestige, the real impact is borne by families who have lived under legal uncertainty for decades. Sale, development, or division of property is effectively frozen, and relationships among branches of the family have grown more distant and litigious.
For the legal system, the case underscores the friction between historical succession laws and modern personal law frameworks. It also reflects how procedural delays can become as decisive as the law itself.
