| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2022 SLG 220 2022 SLD 220 2022 PLD 85 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 22-L of 2014, decided on 29th December, 2021. Date of hearing: 29th December, 2021. (Against the judgment dated 06.12.2013 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Civil Revision No. 233 of 2011).
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
A.G. Tariq Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. M. Shahzad Shaukat, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Civil Appeal No. 22-L of 2014, decided on 29th December, 2021. Date of hearing: 29th December, 2021. (Against the judgment dated 06.12.2013 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Civil Revision No. 233 of 2011).
IJAZ UL AHSAN, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE, SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, JUSTICE
A.G. Tariq Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. M. Shahzad Shaukat, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
FAQIR ALI AND OTHErs
VS
SAKINA BIBI AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Islamic law--- ----Gift---Proof---Pre-requisites and burden of proof---Whether gift is required to be registered---Gift in order to be valid and binding on the parties must fulfill three conditions, namely declaration of gift by the donor; acceptance of gift by the donee, and delivery of possession of corpus---Valid gift could also be effected orally if the said three prerequisites were complied with and proved through valid and cogent evidence---Written instrument was not a requirement under the Islamic Law nor was the same compulsorily registerable under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908---However, strict compliance of the three mandatory conditions was required and registration of the document was of no help if any of the three conditions were not satisfied---Beneficiary of a document was not only bound to prove execution of the document but also to prove the gift by producing cogent and reliable evidence that the three necessary requirements of a valid gift namely, offer, acceptance and delivery of possession have been fulfilled, to the satisfaction of the Court. (b) Gift--- ----Fraudulent gift mutation---Limitation for challenging a fraudulent gift mutation---Where fraud and collusion were alleged and established, the question of limitation did not and could not help the beneficiary of such fraud and collusion---Fraud vitiates even the most solemn transactions and any transaction that was base upon fraud was void and notwithstanding the bar of limitation---Courts would not act as helpless by allowing a fraud to perpetuate. (c) Gift--- ----Proof---Gift mutations allegedly procured through fraud to deprive sisters of their share in inheritance---Court to scrutinize reasons and justification of gift---In the wake of frivolous gifts generally made to deprive female members of the family from benefit of inheritance available to them under Sharia as well as the law, the Courts were not divested of the powers to scrutinize the reasons and justification for a gift so that no injustice was done to a legal heir who otherwise stood to inherit from the estate of a deceased predecessor or relative and that the course of inheritance was not bypassed or…
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