This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Since the khuzaima qutbuddin died and his succession case has been cancelled at the moment. Taher cannot claim the succession title, unless and until his fathers title is established. Rukn950 (talk) 14:20, 9 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
Can Rukn950 provide any evidence of this statement? Press articles all mention that Taher Fakhruddin can apply to continue the case, and even Mufaddal Saifuddin's own lawyers have admitted as such to the press, and these comments have been published. Am removing the notability tag which is based on this incorrect information. Juzarbhai (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
These articles only say that the cross examination dates were cancelled, not that the court case is cancelled. Many other articles, including those as late as 22 May 2016 make it clear that the case will continue. [3][4][5]
