Mumbai: 35 years later, Pali Hill family again threatened to leave premises

Jun 16, 2015, 06:59 IST | Ranjeet Jadhav

According to the residents of B-62, they had been issued threats back in 1980 as well, when around 40 people asked them to vacate the premises

Residents of B-62 bungalow on Pali Hill are no strangers to threats and intimidating behaviour. According to them, the June 10 incident in which nearly 100 people stormed into their house and asked them to vacate the property is a replay of what happened back in 1980.

Dulcene Ansari (left) said this is the second time that goons have barged into their home and asked them to leave. She has been staying in the bungalow since 1956. Pics/Nimesh Dave
Dulcene Ansari (left) said this is the second time that goons have barged into their home and asked them to leave. She has been staying in the bungalow since 1956. Pics/Nimesh Dave

On Wednesday (June 10), about 100 people entered the bungalow on Zig Zag Road at Pali Hill, and threatened the tenants to leave the premises. The residents are the Ansaris -- Dulcene (80), her son Aneev (44), his wife Minaz (39), and their two children, Rhyan (9) and Rafael (6). When the goons entered the bungalow, Minaz had gone to drop off Rhyan to karate class.

“Around 100 people barged into our house when my mother-in-law and younger son were alone at home. When I reached home at around 6.15 pm, I saw that these people were misbehaving with my mother-in-law and were even trying to push her out of the bungalow after snatching her phone.

My younger son was screaming at the top of his voice out of fear, but the people with nearly 10 women part of the group were telling us to go away,” Minaz told mid-day.

Second time
According to Dulcene, in 1980, around 40 goons had entered their home and demanded that they pack up and leave. “A similar incident had happened in 1980 when people had entered our house and asked us to go away from our house. We had then approached the police station, after which the issue was sorted out,” recalled the elderly woman.

According to the police, 24 people have been arrested in connection with the incident. They were all produced in court yesterday and remanded to judicial custody. According to Minaz, 8-10 women were also part of the mob. However, police claimed they didn’t find any women on the spot.

“The complainant has said in their statement that there were also women present at the spot. But when our police team reached the spot, we did not find any women. We are investigating into the matter and those accused who have been arrested are from different locations.

Some are from Khar East, some are from Mahim and some from Kandivli,” said Dattatray Bhargude, senior police inspector, Khar Police. Minaz said their house was a complete mess after the incident and alleged that cash worth Rs 10,000 got stolen. “I don’t think there was any intention to steal, since my laptop was untouched,” she said.

According to a police official, who requested anonymity, “This is an ongoing property dispute case. This can be the reason for the incident.” The Ansaris live on the first floor of the 1,600-sq foot bungalow. “My mother-in-law has been staying here since 1956; I’ve been staying here since the last thirteen years.

It’s a tenancy dispute wherein the developer is saying that we are not tenants. The developer claims he was not behind Wednesday’s incident. We also don’t want to accuse anyone,” Minaz told this paper. The family’s lawyer explained, “The family has been staying in the bungalow since 1956, and the property went for development in 1976.

The developer has been claiming that the Ansaris are not the tenants. A case was also filed regarding the same by the developer in the city civil and small causes court, but he lost the case. He then filed a civil revision application in the High Court in the ’90s and the hearing will come up soon.”

Police will now be patrolling the area on a regular basis; a constable has also been temporarily posted at the bungalow. The Ansaris, on their part, are planning to install CCTV cameras on their premises. mid-day tried to contact the builder, but his phone was not reachable.

Go to top