Saif’s Pataudi property reportedly valued at 750 cr

November 7, 2012
saif_pataudi


Sources indicate that Saif Ali Khan, the current Nawab of Pataudi, has a huge ancestral property in his name in Pataudi. It is said that the palace and some of the the other family properties collectivelly are reportedly valued around Rs 750 cr.

Our source says, "Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi has left the lion's share of his assets to his only son Saif. His daughters Saba and Soha are also reportedly mentioned in the will and are beneficiaries." In this context, Saif said, "I do not think the property is valued at as much as that. I don't really know the exact amount, but it sounds a bit high. It's ancestral property, so beyond value.'"


In the meantime, it's said post the Saifeena shaadi that happened last month, Pataudi's first family were likely to meet and resolve the property issues. Sharmila Tagore will represent her husband Mansoor Ali Khan.

Way back in 2003, Mansoor Ali Khan's two sisters, Saliha and Sabiha, had also staked their claim to the ancestral property in Pataudi. Matters have still not been resolved.



Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 3,2020

Feb 3: Actor-cum-activist Swara Bhaskar on Sunday targetted the Central government over granting Padma Shri to Pakistan-origin singer Adnan Sami who became an Indian citizen in 2016.

Addressing "Save the Constitution, Save the Country" rally here in Madhya Pradesh, Bhaskar said that passing the new citizenship amendment act tantamount to "betrayal" of the Constitution.

Sami, born in London to a Pakistani Air force veteran, applied for Indian citizenship in 2015 and became a citizen of the country in January 2016.

He was one of the 118 people chosen for the Padma Shri awards by the Centre last month.

"The legal process to grant citizenship to refugees and arrest infiltrators already exists in India. You (the government) have granted Indian citizenship to Adnan Sami and now selected him for Padma Shri through that process. (If this is the case) What is the need and justification for the Citizenship Amendment Act?" Bhaskar asked.

"On the one hand you abuse us (anti-CAA protesters), cane-charge us, slap us, hurl teargas shells at us and on the other hand you award Padma Shri to a Pakistani," she said

Bhaskar said the government labels some people as the members of "tukde-tukde gang" and anti-nationals" as per its convenience.

"Supporters of the CAA and the NRC keep harping about the so-called infiltrators having entered our country. If that is the case then why are we unable to see these intruders?" she asked.

"The problem is that they have intruded into the minds of the government and the ruling party," she said.

Bhaskar said the government seems to have "fallen in love with Pakistan".

"It sees Pakistan everywhere. My devout grandmother doesn't chant Hanuman Chalisa as often as this government keeps chanting the Pakistan mantra," she said.

Without naming the RSS, the actor said, "Sitting in Nagpur, these people are spreading politics of hatred".

Bhaskar said Pakistan chose to become a religious nation after the Partition in 1947 unlike India which opted to become a "secular republic where one's religion has nothing to do with citizenship".

"(Pakistan founder Mohammad Ali) Jinnah died a long ago, but his admirers want to divide the country again in the name of a religion," Bhaskar said.

She criticised BJP national general secretary Kailash Vijayvargiya for his controversial remarks about the 'presence' of Bangladeshi infiltrators in Indore, after some labourers were found eating poha and not rotis.

"If poha is Bangladeshi cuisine, then Kailash Vijayvariya, who grew up eating poha (in Indore), should be required to show his Indian citizenship papers," she demanded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 10,2020

Feb 10: Bong Joon-ho’s film “Parasite” starts in a dingy, half-basement apartment with a family of four barely able to scratch out a life. There must be no place to go but up, right? Yes and no. There’s nothing predictable when the South Korean director is on his game.

This dark, socially conscious film about the intertwining of two families is an intricately plotted, adult thriller. We can go up, for sure, but Bong can also take us deeper down. There’s always an extra floor somewhere in this masterpiece.

It tells the story of the impoverished four-person Kim family who, one by one, and with careful and devious planning, all get employed by the four-person affluent Park family — as a tutor, an art teacher, a driver and a housekeeper. They are imposters stunned by the way wealth can make things easier: “Money is an iron. It smooths out all the creases,” says the Park patriarch with wonder.

Bong, who directed and wrote the story for “Parasite,” has picked his title carefully, of course. Naturally, he’s alluding to the sycophantic relationship by a clan of scammers to the clueless rich who have unwittingly opened the doors of their home on a hill. But it’s not that simple. The rich family seem incapable of doing anything — from dishes to sex — without help. Who’s scamming who?

Bong’s previous films play with film genres and never hide their social commentary — think of the environmentalist pig-caper “Okja” and the dystopian sci-fi global warming scream “Snowpiercer.” But this time, Bong’s canvas is a thousand times smaller and his focus light-years more intense. There are no CGI train chases on mountains or car chases through cities. (There is also, thankfully, 100% less Tilda Swinton, a frequent, over-the-top Bong collaborator.

The two Korean families first make contact when a friend of the Kim’s son asks him to take over English lessons for the Park daughter. Soon the son (a dreamy Choi Woo-sik) convinces them to hire his sister (the excellent Park So-dam) as an art teacher, but doesn’t reveal it’s his sis. She forges her diploma and spews arty nonsense she learned on the internet, impressing the polite but firm Park matriarch (a superb Jo Yeo-jeong.)

The Park’s regular chauffer is soon let go and replaced by the Kim patriarch (a steely Lee Sun-kyun). Ditto the housemaid, who is dumped in favor of the Kims’ mother (a feisty Jang Hye-jin.) All eight people seem happy with the new arrangement until Bong reveals a twist: There are more parasites than you imagined. The clean, impeccably furnished Park home will have some blood splashing about.

Bong’s trademark slapstick is still here but the rough edges of his often too-loud lessons are shaved down nicely and his actors step forward. “Keep it focused,” the Kim’s son counsels his father at one point. Bong has followed that advice.

There are typically dazzling Bong touches throughout. Just look for all the insect references — stink bugs at the beginning to flies at the end, and a preoccupation with odor across the frames. And there’s a scene in which the rich matriarch skillfully winds noodles in a bowl while, in another room, duct tape is being wrapped around a victim and classical music plays.

Bong could have been more strident in his social critique but hasn’t. There are no villains in “Parasite” — and also no heroes. Both families are forever broken after chafing against each other, a bleak message about the classes ever really co-existing (Take that, “Downton Abbey”).

“Parasite” is a worthy winner of the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, the first South Korean movie to win the prestigious top prize. The director has called it an “unstoppably fierce tragicomedy.” We just call it brilliant.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 11,2020

New Delhi, Jan 11: The Delhi High Court on Saturday restrained from releasing Deepika Padukone-starrer 'Chhapaak' movie without due credits to the lawyer who represented the acid attack survivor, Lakshmi Agarwal, in her legal battle.

The restraint will be effective from January 15 in multiplexes and live streaming and for others from January 17.

The court directed filmmaker Meghna Gulzar to give due credit to lawyer Aparna Bhat who fought the criminal case for the acid survivor on whose life the movie is based.

It passed the order on a petition filed by Fox Studio challenging a trial court order which had directed the filmmakers to give credit to Bhat.

Delhi's Patiala House Court had earlier this week passed an order granting an ex-parte interim mandatory injunction directed that the filmmaker has to carry a line "Aparna Bhat continues to fight cases of sexual and physical violence against women" during the screening of the film.

Fox Studios then requested the Delhi High Court to set aside the trial court order.

The petitioner submitted that if the order passed in a suit filed just one day before the release of the film, is not vacated, varied or modified, then the petitioner will suffer grave injustice and irreparable harm and injury.

The movie, which hit the cinemas yesterday, is based on Laxmi's life. In 2005, at the age of 15, she was allegedly attacked by a spurned lover.

Laxmi had to undergo several surgeries. Later, she started helping other acid attack survivors and promoted campaigns to stop such gruesome attacks.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.