‘Refutation of nass on defendant not proved by plaintiffs’

MUMBAI: On the penultimate day of the final hearing in the Syedna succession case, Janak Dwarkadas, counsel for defendant Syedna Mufaddal Saifuddin, refuted the allegations of a conspiracy by the original plaintiff’s brothers and nephews to keep him away from succeeding the 52nd Dai. ‘Refutation of nass on defendant not proved by plaintiffs’ The counsel submitted that the original plaintiff had resorted to the conspiracy theory concoction to sustain both his claim of secrecy regarding the 1965 nass conferred on him as well as his refutation of the four nass in 1969, 2005 and twice in 2011 on the defendant. If the conspiracy theory collapsed, the entire claim of the secret 1965 nass and the refutation of the nass on the defendant would collapse, said Dwarkadas. Dwarkadas, referring to the decision of the original plaintiff to ostensibly leave the country before June 20, 2011 to avoid forced acceptance of the defendant’s appointment as successor and the claim of the plaintiff that the 52nd Dai was infirm and incapable of conferring a nass on the defendant, submitted that the burden of proof was on the plaintiffs, but they had failed to prove it.