| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 3004 2015 SLD 3004 2015 YLR 2443 |
Peshawar High Court
C.R. No. 90-M of 2012, decided on 7th November, 2014.
MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, J
Abdul Wadood for Petitioners. Shah Salam Khan and Abdul Halim Khan for
Respondents.
C.R. No. 90-M of 2012, decided on 7th November, 2014.
MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, J
Abdul Wadood for Petitioners. Shah Salam Khan and Abdul Halim Khan for
Respondents.
Mst. SHAHI LAL and 5 others
VS
KHURSHID ALI KHAN and 13 others
Law:
Section:
Islamic law-- --Inheritance-Custom-Neither mother of plaintiff nor other daughter of propositus claimed inheritance during their lifetime nor they filed any suit before any fora---Present suit had been filed after 50 years of death of mother of plaintiff---Mother of plaintiff was not entitled to the legacy of her father as per law/custom prevailing at the relevant time as legacy of propositus would devolve upon his sons---Plaintiff could not claim succession under Muslim Personal Law in the estate of his maternal grandfather---Findings recorded by the courts below were based on misreading and non-reading of evidence available on record---Impugned s and decrees passed by the courts below were set aside and suit was dismissed---Revision was accepted in circumstances. Muhammad Rustam and others v. Maki-tan Jan and others 2013 SCMR 299; Abdul Haq and another v. Mst. Surrya Begum 2002 SCMR 1330; Noor Din and another v. Additional District Judge, Lahore 2014 SCMR 513; Mst. Garana through legal heirs v. Sahib Kamala Bibi and another PLD 2014 SC 167 and Mst. Farida and others v. Rehmatullah PLD 1984 Pesh. 117 rel. JUDGMENT MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, J.---This revision petition is directed against judgment dated 3-12-2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge Izafi Zila Qazi-VI, Swat, whereby three appeals filed by the petitioners as well as respondents Nos. 2 to 14 were dismissed and the judgment dated 20-12-2010 passed by learned Civil Judge/Illaqa Qazi-XVI, Swat was kept intact. 2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the instant petition are that respondent No.1 instituted a suit bearing No. 42/1 against the petitioners for declaration, perpetual injunction and as consequential relief for possession of the property fully described in the heading of plaint. The suit was contested by the petitioners and after recording pro-contra evidence, the learned trial Court through judgment and decree dated 20-12-2010 decreed the suit of respondent No. 1 against the petitioners. Feeling dissatisfied, the petitioners preferred an appeal bearing No. 43/13 whereas respondents Nos. 2 to 14, who were not party in the original suit, filed appeal bearing No. 41/13 and respondent…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492