1989 PLP 4878 (MLD)

Criminal Revision No.1223‑D of 1989, decided on 3rd July, 1989. ‑‑S.115‑‑Revisional jurisdiction, exercise of‑‑Both Trial and Appellate Courts, on basis of evidence on record, found that ancestor of parties, belonged to Shia sect of Islam‑‑Concurrent findings of Courts below based on evidence on record, held, could not be interfered with in revisional jurisdiction of High Court when no misreading or non‑reading of evidence or illegality and irregularity, committed by Courts below have been pointed out. Choudhry Muhammad Abdus Salim for Petitioners. The dispute relates to the inheritance of the landed estate covering an area of 336 kanals 7 marlas, situate in Mangat estate, tehsil and district Sheikhupura, left by the late Inayat, son of Qadoo. Rafique and Anwar, sons of Hadoo, petitioners, are father's brothers of Inayat. Mst. Allah Jawai, respondent 1, is the mother, Mst. Mehran Bibi and Mst. Jannat Bibi, respondents 2 and 3. are sisters of Inayat. Considering Inayat to belong to Shia sect of Islam when he died, the Revenue authorities, mutated his land in the names of the respondents, to the exclusion of the petitioners, according to the Shia Law of inheritance. The petitioners alleged that Inayat was Sunni at the time of his death and; therefore. They were entitled to inherit 1/6 shares of his estate. They filed suit in the Civil Court of Sheikhupura to get recognition of their right. However, their suit was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Sheikhupura, on the 29th November, 1987; and their appeal against the decision of the learned Civil Judge met the same fate at the hands of the learned Additional District Judge, Sheikhupura, on the 17th April, 1989. Both the learned trial and the appellate Courts accepted the respondents' version of the case that Inayat professed Shia faith when he died. Feeling aggrieved the petitioners have invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners has been unable to point out any misreading or ignoring of evidence by the learned Courts below while formulating their decisions. A very significant piece of evidence consists of the deposition of Syed Mehrajul Hassan, DW 1, a Shia, who led the funeral prayers of Inayat. He bore out that Inayat was Shia and therefore he had led his funeral prayers. Syed Mehrajul Hassan DW 1 was not cross‑examined on this point so as to shake his veracity. Only one of the petitioners' witnesses said that the funeral prayers of Inayat had been led by one Mian Aslam, a Sunni Imam Masjid. However, none of the other witnesses of the petitioners corroborated him nor was Mian Aslam brought in the witness‑box. The learned Courts below having committed no illegality or irregularity, their judgments cannot be interfered with. This revision petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T/R‑183/L Revision dismissed.