| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 2846 2024 SLD 2846 2024 CLC 106 |
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.1095-D of 2010, decided on 8th December, 2022.Date of hearing: 8th December, 2022.
Before Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi, J
Mian Muhammad Akram and Rai Mueen-ud-Din for Petitioner. Mian Mumtaz Ahmad Zahid for
Respondent No.1. Ex parte for
Respondents Nos.1B and 3. Nemo for remaining
Respondents.
Civil Revision No.1095-D of 2010, decided on 8th December, 2022.Date of hearing: 8th December, 2022.
Before Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi, J
Mian Muhammad Akram and Rai Mueen-ud-Din for Petitioner. Mian Mumtaz Ahmad Zahid for
Respondent No.1. Ex parte for
Respondents Nos.1B and 3. Nemo for remaining
Respondents.
ALLAH DITTA----Petitioner
VERSUS
ALI SHAH (DECEASED) through Legal Heirs and others----Respondents
Law:
Section:
Islamic law--- ----Inheritance, right of---Limitation---Revenue entries, rectification / correction of---Recurring cause of action---Scope---Plaintiff claimed his share being real son and sole legal heir of his late mother out of her(mother's) share from the estate of her brother (deceased) by specifically challenging relevant mutations and Shajrah-e-Nasb---Suit for declaration filed by the petitioner/plaintiff was concurrently dismissed---Validity---Record revealed that the petitioner/plaintiff , in his evidence, had duly exhibited a document(which was the succession certificate for receipt of due debts of another late brother of petitioner's mother) and the name of petitioner/plaintiff was reflecting in said document (certificate)---Jamabandi for the relevant year regarding land / estate left by petitioner's late mother also showed his name as owner of said land / estate (left by his late mother)---Petitioner could not have been deprived of his lawful share out of the share of his mother from the estate of her deceased brother ---No one could be allowed to approbate reprobate, or otherwise blow hot and cold in one breath---In said circumstances, claim of petitioner/plaintiff was required to be determined by taking into consideration all relevant facts and documents brought on record rather than deciding the lis on technical grounds---Suit of the petitioner being a matter of inheritance was within time---No illegal act or wrong entry could be legitimized with efflux of time, howsoever long it might be---Mother of the petitioner/plaintiff was real sister of her deceased brother and petitioner /plaintiff being real son and sole legal heir of said lady had claimed his share in said capacity in the inheritance left by his maternal uncle---No limitation would run in the matter of inheritance having recurring cause of action---Party having its right in the inherited property could claim the same at any time---Any transaction found to be result of misrepresentation could not be protected on the sole score of limitation as the same did not apply in the case of inheritance as barrier of limitation was no more a hurdle in the enforcement of rights of inheritance unless…
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