Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 1777 2022 SLD 1777 2022 PLJ 416
Supreme Court of Pakistan
C.As. No. 53 54 of 2015, decided on 30.6.2022. (Against the order dated 26.12.2000 passed by the Peshawar High Court in C.R. No. 41 of 1995)
SAJJAD ALI SHAH AND AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN, JJ.
Mr. Tariq Mahmood, Sr. ASC and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR for Appellants (in both). Mr. Muhammad Munir Paracha, ASC alongwith Mr. Zulfiqar Khalid Maluka, ASC for Repsondents Nos. 1(i-iii), 5(Lrs), 6-11, 12(Lrs), 19(Lrs), 20-23, 33(Lrs), 35(Lrs) in CA

ABDUL KHALIQ (decd) thr. LRs

VS

FAZALUR REHMAN and others

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 9

Specific Relief Act, 1877 (I of 1877)-- ----S. 9--Suit for possession--Claim of sharai share--Dismissal of suit--Death of father--Entire property was went to his son as per prevent custom--Exclusion of deceased’s daughter--Son of deceased was died issueless--Entire property was went to his only sister--Suit property was gifted to appellants--Last full owner--Customary law are placed much below i.e. under sub-heading No. IV as ‘DESCENDANTS OF TRUE GRANDFATHER has and would be excluded from inheriting property as residuaries by full sister which is placed above them as per Table of Residuaries--Gift made by Mst. Roshnae to appellants after enactment of Amendment Act of 1964, was valid as she was no longer holding estate as a limited owner--At time inheritance of a deceased Muslim opens, all entitled legal heirs become owners to extent of their shares.   [Pp. 424 ,  425] C, D ,  E Principles of Muhammadan Law-- ----Para 65--Full sister--Full sister stands at Serial No. 6 of Table whereas descendants if true grandfather how-high¬so-ever stand at Serial No. 13 and consequently, submitted that full sister would exclude descendants of true grandfather. [Pp. 418 ,  419] A Principles of Muhammadan Law-- ---Para 65--Table of residuaries--In default of a full brother and other residuaries full sister takes residuary if any. [P. 424] B JUDGMENT Sajjad Ali Shah, J.--Leave was granted in these cases vide our order dated 21.1.2015 to consider whether the impugned judgment of the Peshawar High Court was inconsonance with the evidence led by the parties and the applicable law to the case. 2. The litigation in these cases is not only very old but has a very chequered background. The facts as pleaded and evident from the record are that the property/subject matter admittedly was owned by one Naaju who died somewhere around 1906 leaving behind one son by the name of Abdul Ghufoor and a daughter Mst. Roshnae. In accordance with the prevalent custom, the entire property went to Abdul Ghafoor as the only son to the exclusion of Mst. Roshnae, the daughter. Abdul Ghafoor died issueless in the year 1921 and again, in accordance with the customary law prevalent at the…
🔒
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