Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 1664 2021 SLD 1664 2021 SCMR 1355
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 954 of 2014, decided on 24th June, 2021, Date of hearing: 24th June, 2021. (On appeal against the judgment Dated 20.01.2014 passed by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, in C. R. No. 187-D/2002)
QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Zulfiqar Ali Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Ch. Irfan Saeed, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD SHARIF

VS

MST. NIAMAT BIBI

Law:

Section:

Islamic law--- ----Inheritance---Sunni fiqh---Consanguine paternal uncle's son---Deceased dying issue-less and leaving behind only one full sister---Full sister would inherit both as a sister and if there was no residuary in the different categories for such purpose then she would also take the remainder as a residue, and exclude those falling in a category below her, including 'Consanguine Paternal Uncle's Son'. ORDER Qazi Faez Isa, J. Leave was granted against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court who had upheld the judgment of the Appellate Court decreeing the suit filed by the respondent, which had been dismissed by the Trial Court. In the suit the respondent alleged that she is the daughter of Majeedan, the sole sister of Taj Din alias Tajoo a Rajput, who had died issueless leaving behind as his legal heir just the one sister (Majeedan) who claimed his inheritance both as his sister and also claimed residuary share. Inheritance mutation No. 1392 had been sanctioned in Majeedans favour on 22 March 1973, which the appellant challenged before the Assistant Commissioner exercising powers of Collector (Collector) and his appeal was allowed vide order dated 9 February 1973 and the revenue officials were directed to determine the legal heirs of Taj Din, which was done by the Halqa Patwari and Tehsildar on 25 December 1976; Majeedan was found entitled to half-share in the estate of Taj Din as his sister and the appellant to the remaining half as collateral consanguine male residuary. The appellant based his claim on a fatwa and a pedigree table and which is mentioned in the above mentioned sanction order of 25 December 1976. 2. The learned Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Abbasi, counsel for the appellant, submits that the judgment of the Trial Court, which had dismissed the suit of the respondent, was correct and did not call for any interference by the Appellate Court and the Appellate Court having decided against the appellant the High Court failed to correct the error by not restoring the judgment of the Trial Court. He further submits that the Appellate Court had not properly considered the documents on which the appellant had relied, including the said…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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