| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2617 2010 SLD 2617 2010 SCMR 18 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No.2805 of 2001, decision dated: 9-06-2009 (On appeal from the order, dated 24-9-2001 passed by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench in R.S.A. No.84 of 1985)
M. JAVED BUTTAR, MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD AND SAYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeal No.2805 of 2001, decision dated: 9-06-2009 (On appeal from the order, dated 24-9-2001 passed by the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench in R.S.A. No.84 of 1985)
M. JAVED BUTTAR, MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD AND SAYED ZAHID HUSSAIN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD SHAMIM through Legal Heirs-
VS
. Mst. NISAR FATIMA through Legal Heirs and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Specific Relief Act (I of 1877)-------S. 8---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.41---Recovery of possession---Co-sharers, rights of---Ostensible owner---Protection of S.41 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882---Applicability---Plaintiffs were daughters of deceased owner of suit property and defendant was their cousin who purchased suit property from one of their brothers---Grievance of plaintiffs was that after the death of their father, they were excluded from mutation of inheritance and land was sold to defendant---Plea raised by defendant was that he purchased land from ostensible owner whose name was entered in revenue record---Suit was decreed by Trial Court in favour of plaintiffs but Lower Appellate Court reversed the findings of Trial Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction restored the and decree passed by Trial Court---Validity---Once it was established that plaintiffs were entitled to inherit left over of their deceased father, they became co-sharers in the property on death of their father---Plaintiffs were co-owners of property to the extent of their share for all intents and purposes---Co-sharer was not entitled to alienate more than his share---Each co-sharer was deemed to be owner in joint property and any one of them could not act in a manner which could constitute an invasion on the rights of other co-shares---Though names of ladies (plaintiffs) had been excluded while entering inheritance mutation, yet defendant vendee, who wits their cousin had the knowledge of their due entitlement and share---If defendant simply acted on the basis of revenue entries, he did not adopt due care which an ordinary buyer should have taken---Defendant took advantage of his position being relative and lessee of the properly---Rightful owner of property could not be deprived of his/her share unless precluded to claim the same due to conscious abandonment or relinquishment---Plaintiffs were daughters of deceased owner and under the law entitled to succeed and inherit the left-over of the deceased---Plaintiffs had stepped into the shoes of their father on his death and became share holder to the extent of their shares---Any of the brothers, who were also…
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