1989 PLP 1425(1) (SCMR)
ZAREEN BIBI and others Petitioner Versus INAYAT BEGUM and others Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 1425(1) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | ZAREEN BIBI and others Petitioner Versus INAYAT BEGUM and others Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 1425(1) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 1425(1) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 1425(1) (SCMR) (ZAREEN BIBI and others Petitioner Versus INAYAT BEGUM and others Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- C. A. Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Hamid Aslam Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 11th July, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court. Lahore dated 28 October, 1980 in R. S. A. No.761 of 1980). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑Admission‑‑Alleged statement/admission by respondent had at no stage been considered as a duly proved document‑‑Respondent did not appear in the witness‑box at all nor she had ever been summoned at any stage of the litigation to prove the alleged statement by her‑‑Trial Court, Appellate Court and High Court to second appeal gave concurrent findings of fact in the case against the petitioners‑‑Leave to appeal refused.
Judgment & Decree
JAVID IOBAL J.‑‑This petition for leave to appeal has been filed by the petitioners who claim that Inayat Begum respondent as well as Umar Draz and Mst. Kishwar Sultan respondents are not the wife, and son and daughter of Nur Muhammad deceased. Mst. Zareen Bibi petitioner is daughter of Nur Muhammad from a different wife namely Mst. Nur Bakht petitioner. Their main case was that Mst. Inayat Begum respondent in her statement before a Magistrate had admitted that she was the wife of one Nasrufah. But this statement had at no stage been considered as a duly proved document. hfst. Inayat Begum respondent did not appear in the witness‑box at all nor she had ever been summoned at any stage of the litigation to prove the alleged statement made by her. This was the reason why the trial Court, appellate Court as well as learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in R.SA. gave concurrent findings of fact in this case as against the present petitioners. Since this is the position no interference is called for. The petition is accordingly dismissed. M.B.A./Z‑58/S Petition dismissed.