India Neglects Prince Cyrus

[Max]

Reference
http://www.bbc.com/news/stories-41861843

Likely some Iranian heritage his features and his sister's features certainly look very persian/iranian heritage

In terms of snobbery it was hard to beat the man who claimed to be the last prince of the royal house of Oudh.

"Don't talk to me about the Mughals," Prince Cyrus once bellowed at a friend of mine. "They were as common as dirt."

The Mughals, of course, were the rulers of India from the early 16th Century until the British violently overthrew them in the mid-19th Century. They were, without question, one of the grandest and most powerful imperial families in history.

But Prince Cyrus insisted his lineage was even more noble, despite the fact that he now lived in abject poverty.

The prince was very much a product of his formidably eccentric mother. She called herself Begum Wilayat Mahal and claimed to be the direct heir to the kings of Oudh, whose realm covered much of what is now Uttar Pradesh, India's most populous state.

The family had huge estates and vast palaces, and hosted famously lavish parties. The British regarded them as unacceptably dissolute. A contemporary report describes how the last Nawab of Oudh had resigned himself to a life of "debauchery, dissipation and low pursuits". He was unceremoniously booted off his throne in 1856.

The family lost their fortune but not their sense of entitlement and, in the 1970s, the Begum decided to take action. She camped herself in the First Class Waiting Room of the Delhi railway station together with her young son and daughter, seven liveried Nepali servants, some 15 ferocious bloodhounds, and a collection of huge and beautiful Persian carpets.

And there she insisted she and her retinue would stay until the Indian government recognised the sacrifice she claimed her family had made during the uprising against the British in 1857.

Family took refuge with few reminder of their past , persian carpets which eventually became torn down with age and neglect

Forced to eat on this small able , with few items.... a truely sad tale

Once a powerful family reduced to nothing in India even after independence , the government did not give some partial return of what was taken by force for the family i.e their wealth and state

Forced to live like animals in a deserted building in middle of forest , middle of darkness with no light , or running water

The place did not even had doors or windows !!!

Can you imagine sleeping here ?

The damaged persian rugs ... is all that remains of a family left neglected in India
Becasue India did not felt the family deserved a Government assistance even though a large state was stolen from them

True face of INDIA​

This should be an eye opener for most Iranians

The land which was owned by the family

What iranian have to do with this?

 

[maravan91]

Hello Uncle Joe. My ancestors ruled most of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Their lands were handed over in good faith. Any chance that I could apply for compensation from the India

n government? Perhaps a palace or two in India with paid servants and daily stocks of groceries and luxuries? I will settle for a few Jaguar cars (now that Jaguar pays taxes to India I've been told) and perhaps a few hundred thousand pounds as a lowly stipend to preserve Indian history? Please check and revert

Who r your ancestors?

 

[Politico]

Who r your ancestors?

The British

 

[maravan91]

The British

They left india in 1947.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hello Uncle Joe. My ancestors ruled most of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Their lands were handed over in good faith. Any chance that I could apply for compensation from the Indian government? Perhaps a palace or two in India with paid servants and daily stocks of groceries and luxuries? I will settle for a few Jaguar cars (now that Jaguar pays taxes to India I've been told) and perhaps a few hundred thousand pounds as a lowly stipend to preserve Indian history? Please check and revert

LOL.

That sounds like the Mughals, and they did not hand over their lands in good faith; the good faith is not in question, but the handing over is.

Your rights are defined by the Government of India Act, 1858, wherein the properties and the rights, and the treaty obligations of the joint stock company, the East India Company, were taken over by the British Crown, represented by a Principal Secretary of State, who was to take over the rights and duties of the Company's Board of Directors; implicit is that he was to be a member of the British Cabinet.

There would be a Governor-General, governing the separate Governors of the British provinces in India; there would be an Indian Civil Service, responsible to the Governor-General, and administering the British ruled parts of India, the British colony of India, not including the territories of the princes of India, who were many of them linked to the British Crown through subsidiary alliances. These alliances obliged these princes to rule under the suzerainty of the British Crown; that legal term allowed space for the sovereignty of their territories to remain with the princes, some 561 of them, and allowed for the British Crown's authority to be higher even than sovereignty.

Coming to your claims: with a humourless, dry-as-a-stick ministry like the present, you might not get anywhere. With a more broad-minded political point of view in office, you might legitimately lay claim to specific properties, just as Jinnah's house in Bombay might be claimed by the Wadias, as natural heirs of Dina Wadia, nee Jinnah. For all that to have even a skeletal chance of success, you must find a lawyer of the stature of Jethmalani (not Jethmalani; as a Sindhi, he might have residual animus in himself towards those now ruling his homeland, Sindh).

Hope you can use this for pondering over your next course of action.

 

[Joe Shearer]

What iranian have to do with this?

He wants Iranians to hate us for ill-treating somebody who was Iranian some five hundred years ago. Your emoticons are adequate, but just; some more heavy-duty emoticons are called for in this particular hero's case.

 

[Brickwall]

Don't know written by BBC

It seems iNDIAN government did not wanted to look after the people who owned ownership of land and did not give nothing back to the decendents after independence

dodgey country , india

Oh you are favour of supporting them, see problem is India is moved away from feudal lords to democracy.

But If Pakistan want to take responsibility to support so called Owner , we will be more than glad to ship them to you

 

[AZADPAKISTAN2009]

such a cruel nation , left a family to die in middle of forest

Even the british had decency to give them a small home and resoucrs to live out their lives in dignity , just goes to show you difference between Bristish and Indian

 

[Joe Shearer]

such a cruel nation , left a family to die in middle of forest

Even the british had decency to give them a small home and resoucrs to live out their lives in dignity , just goes to show you difference between Bristish and Indian

LOL.

The British didn't give them a small home and resources to live out their lives in dignity. Can't you read? It was Rajiv Gandhi's government that did! What the British did was to grab their state, an ally of the British and a major lender of money. Two years after the take-over, the British found, to their consternation, that they still owed the state of Oudh, that is, the former King, the sum of 2.0 million Pds. Convert that from 1858 pounds to 2017; the descendants, the legitimate descendants of whom are very well known and very well identified, probably own most of Britain.

Since you have done no homework and merely keep pushing the fact that they are Iranian in the faces of Iranian members, presumably in the hope that they will also turn out to be dim-witted and immature as some others have shown themselves to be, you might be interested to know that there is a clearly defined list of acknowledged descendants, and that they continue to get a pension to this day.

@Politico
@somebozo

Put in your bids.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities...ii-banking-on-land-survey/article20360969.ece