Law:

Section:

Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925)---.--- ---.----Ss. 291, 299 & 373---.---Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.), R.400---.---Succession certificate and Letters of Administration---.---Surety bond---.---Powers of Court---.---Appellant filed application for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of immovable properties which belonged to his deceased mother---.---Single Judge of High Court granted Letter of Administration in the name of appellant, subject to his furnishing surety/security bond---.---Validity---.---Where Court granted Letters of Administration to petitioner on his application, the Court had no power to dispense with the surety, which was a condition precedent for issuance of Letters of Administration---.---Under S.281(2)(b) of Succession Act, 1925, there was no discretion with Court to demand a bond from a person to whom a probate was granted in as much as the word 'may' had been used therefore, it was discretionary---.---Where the case before Court did not fall under S.373(3) or (4) of Succession Act, 1925, the Court had discretion to dispense with the security while granting Succession Certificate but in respect of cases falling under S.373(3) or (4) of Succession Act, 1925, the Court could not grant Succession Certificate without first obtaining security from petitioner---.---Provision of R.400 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.) was in the nature of subordinate legislation and it could not over-ride the effect of S.291 of Succession Act, 1925, as the same was a substantive provision of law---.---To the extent of inconsistency between the two, the substantive provisions of S.291 of Succession Act, 1925, would prevail over R.400 of Sindh Chief Court Rules (O.S.)---.---Where a particular procedure was prescribed for doing something that thing must be done according to that procedure otherwise the entire proceedings would be illegal or irregular---.---Single Judge of High Court had rightly decided application in accordance with law and the order did not require any interference in intra-court appeal---.---Appeal was dismissed in circumstances. Muhammad Shafiq's case PLD 2014 Sindh 541; Kamran Mirza v. Moazzam Mirza PLD 2014 Sindh 500; Mst. Razia…

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