Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

1989 SCMR 1211

GHULAM QADIR vs ABDUL MAJID and 11 others

Petitioner: GHULAM QADIR VS Respondent: ABDUL MAJID and 11 others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan Decision Date: 1989-03-25

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Saad Saood Jan Title: GHULAM QADIR vs ABDUL MAJID and 11 others Case No.: Civil Petition for Leave to Appeal No,477 of 1985 Date of Judgment:1989-03-25 Reported As: 1989 SCMR 1211 Result: Leave refused

Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the defendant in a suit for declaration arising out of an inheritance dispute, against the dismissal of his Civil Revision by the High Court. Fazal Hussain (Din) the last owner died issueless. Charagh Din respondents' predecessor-in- interest claimed himself as an heir. On the other hand Hussain Bibi, the widow, claimed that after the death of her husband, said Charagh Din had surrendered his rights in her favour. Thereafter she gifted the property which was in her possession as a limited owner in favour of Ghulam Qadir petitioner who is her son from her previous husband (Pichhlag). As Charagh Din, did not accept the genuineness/validity of the aforementioned surrender accordingly suit was filed from the respondents' side against the petitioner seeking declaration regarding 3/4th of the estate of the deceased. The suit was decreed. The petitioner's appeal and revision having been dismissed he has now sought leave to appeal. ' After hearing the learned counsel we are satisfied that Mst. Hussain Bibi was a limited owner. It has also been correctly held against the petitioner that she was never accepted by Charagh Din as absolute or sole owner nor he ever surrendered his reversionary rights in her favour. Arguments on both these questions not having found favour with the learned Courts below the concurrent findings rendered against the petitioner have been found to be unexceptionable. Leave to appeal, accordingly, is refused.

Related Legal Research & Directories