HC to hear Wajid Khan’s wife’s plea over property dispute on August 5

Mumbai: Kamalrukh Khan, the wife of late music composer Wajid Khan, has approached the Bombay high court seeking three fourth share in the property and estate of her husband that has allegedly been denied to her by her mother-in-law and brother-in-law

Mumbai: Kamalrukh Khan, the wife of late music composer Wajid Khan, has approached the Bombay high court seeking three fourth share in the property and estate of her husband that has allegedly been denied to her by her mother-in-law and brother-in-law. The petition was to be heard on June 24 but was adjourned due to paucity of time.

Wajid Khan, a well-known singer and music composer, along with his brother had started the M/s Sajid Wajid LLP in 2014.

Kamalrukh, who is a Parsi, has claimed that since she was married to Wajid as per the Special Marriage Act, she, her children and the mother of the deceased are eligible for an equal share in his property. In her petition, Kamalrukh claimed that as she and her deceased husband decided to send their 16-year-old daughter to pursue education in the US, she wants liquidation of assets in the name of her husband.

Khan had approached the HC in 2021 through advocates Bahraiz Irani and Afrin Dala seeking probation of the Will prepared by Wajid Khan in 2012. However, even before the petition could be heard, Kamalrukh learnt that her mother-in-law and brother-in-law were in the process of creating third-party rights in the property in the name of her husband without her knowledge and hence filed an interim application seeking directions to restrain them from doing so.

In the first hearing before the bench of justice Gautam Patel on April 7, 2021, the mother and brother through advocate Bhalchandra Saraf had given a statement that they would file an affidavit disclosing the entire estate of the deceased Wajid Khan along with the necessary tax returns and their accompanied computation of income or sale.

The court also sought details of the returns of the Limited Liability Company (M/s Sajid Wajid LLP) in which the deceased had an interest and all other similar commercial entities in which the deceased had any interest or share (apart from regular investments) with complete financials.

Wajid Khan, a well-known singer and music composer, along with his brother had started the M/s Sajid Wajid LLP in 2014. The duo had accumulated a lot of wealth and had invested the same in properties as well as paintings and other assets individually and jointly. The investments were cumulatively valued at ₹22 crore (approx.), as per the knowledge of Kamalrukh.

Wajid Khan succumbed to Covid-19 on June 1, 2020, while undergoing treatment at a hospital in Chembur.

According to the interim application, after the couple got married, Wajid’s mother wanted her to convert to Islam but as she refused, Wajid was pressurised by his mother to file for a divorce in 2017.

“Divorce proceedings were initiated and consent terms had also been filed. Wajid had been paying maintenance as per the Consent Terms. However, after his demise, it stopped and though the Will, which is yet to be probated, had stated that his property should be shared in equal proportion between the mother, Kamalrukh and his two children. The wife and children were alienated from it,” it said.

The application states that the mother-in-law and brother-in-law had started creating third-party rights in the property in the name of Wajid based on hibanama (a gift deed through which a person can gift all or part of their estate to anyone), which was prepared a few days before his demise.

The application has prayed that as the marriage between Kamalrukh and Wajid was under the Special Marriage Act, the wife and children were eligible for a share in the property as per the Indian Succession Act and hence sought the appointment of a Court Receiver to the property owned solely or jointly by the deceased as well as all financial details.

Though the application was listed for hearing on June 24 before the single judge bench of justice R I Chagla, due to paucity of time it was not taken up and the hearing was adjourned to August 5.