Case Details

Citation(s)
2022 SLG 22 2022 SLD 22 2022 SCMR 13
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 438 of 2021, decided on 26th October, 2021. Date of hearing: 26th October, 2021. (On appeal from the order dated 18.01.2016 of the Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench (Dar-ul-Qaza) Swat passed in Civil Revision No. 271-M/15)
QAZI FAEZ ISA, JUSTICE, YAHYA AFRIDI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Siddique Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants. Dil Muhammad Khan Alizai, Advocate Supreme Court, Nazir Ahmad Bhutta, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Respo

MST. HAYAT BIBI AND OTHERS

VS

ALAMZEB AND OTHERS

Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 42,54

(a) Islamic law--- ----Inheritance---Legal heir or a third party laying exclusive claim to property---Burden of proof---On the death of a Muslim his/her property devolved on his/her legal heirs in accordance with the shares prescribed by Islamic Shariah and possession by any legal heir was deemed to be possession by all---If someone laid exclusive claim to the property, or to any part thereof, which was contrary to the shares as determined by Shariah, the burden to establish such claim rested on the one alleging it. (b) Specific Relief Act, (I of 1877)--- ----Ss. 42 54---Suit for declaration and permanent injunction---Inheritance---Step mother depriving her daughters from the estate of their father through a purported Meharnama (dower deed) and a Razinama (compromise)---Held, that since the step mother claimed that her husband H had given away all his property to her as mehr (dower) and she and her two children based this claim on a Meharnama, they had to prove that the Meharnama was executed by H---Admittedly, the two persons shown to be the attesting witnesses to the Meharnama purportedly did so when they were minors, and no explanation was offered why one was only 7 years old, and the other 16 years were called to attest it---Such fact raised serious doubts about the authenticity of the Meharnama and it appeared that it was manufactured to deprive the legal heirs of H from their inheritance---Significantly, the Meharnama only surfaced after the filing of the suit---Meharnama also did not find mention in the subsequent Razinama which was purportedly prepared after a Jirgah was held---If the Meharnama did exist it would have been natural to show it to the members of the Jirgah who would have mentioned it in the Razinama---Burden to establish the execution by H of the Meharnama lay upon the step mother and her children (respondents), who had failed to establish its execution, therefore, the Meharnama could not be relied upon and used to deprive Hs heirs from their inheritance---Furthermore out of the 20 signatories to the Razinama only one of them was produced to testify and his testimony did not accord with the contents of the Razinama---Razinama purported to…
🔒
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