Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Mst. RASULAN and 7 others VS Respondent: Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM and 2 others
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Dr. Javed Iqbal, Syed Usman Ali Shah Title: Mst. RASULAN and 7 others vs Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM and 2 others Case No.: Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,220 of 1984 Date of Judgment:1989-02-20 Reported As: 1989 SCMR 1778 Result: Leave refused
Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought against the dismissal by the High Court of petitioners' Civil Revision. ' The petitioners' side had instituted a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondents basing their claim on the inheritance of one Noora deceased, the last male-holder. According to petitioners he left only Mamoora, a son as an heir and, therefore, he was to inherit the property exclusively. The respondents, however, claimed as widow and daughters respectively of Noora; therefore, the suit was filed to get the dispute regarding inheritance adjudicated upon. At the trial oral as well as documentary evidence was produced. The Nikahnama of respondent No,1 with Noora and the birth entries of respondents Nos. 2 and 3, showing them as daughters of Noora, were also produced in evidence. The suit was dismissed. The petitioners also failed in appeal and revision. ' Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the concurrent findings of fact reached by the learned Courts below. He has pointed out some discrepancies in the documentary evidence vis-a- vis the date of the death of Noora. Same discrepancies relate to the birth entries of the respondents Nos.2 and 3 which have been placed on record. After perusal thereof the so-called discrepancies get explained. Photostat copy of the Nikahnama has not been placed on record. We, therefore, would not make any comment with regard to the authenticity of the disputed entries made therein nor would say that some changes might have been made therein subsequent to the relevant stages of dispute. Be that as it may oral evidence was also led from both sides. Paternity of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 besides being established by other evidence, stood also corroborated by the position taken by the mother with regard to the fact as to who their father was. On
---
## Page 2
legitimacy also there is nothing on the record to show that respondent No,1 was not married to Noora deceased. On the contrary the concurrent findings of fact by the learned Courts below do not suffer from any error of appreciation of evidence, legal or otherwise. There is no merit in this petition. Leave to appeal, therefore, is refused.