1968 SCMR 335 (PLP)
IFTIKHAR NAZIR AHMAD KHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus AHMAD MUKHTAR AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1968 SCMR 335 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | IFTIKHAR NAZIR AHMAD KHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus AHMAD MUKHTAR AND OTHERS-Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCMR 335 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCMR 335 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCMR 335 (PLP) (IFTIKHAR NAZIR AHMAD KHAN AND OTHERS-Petitioners Versus AHMAD MUKHTAR AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mahmud Ali Qasuri, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Siddiq, Senior Attorney for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Shabir Ahmed, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Muhammad Ashraf Falahi, Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Inayat Hussain, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore dated the 19th May 1967, in R. F. As. Nos. 111 of 1956 and 114 of 1956, respectively.) Muhammadan Law-Marriage-Question relating to status of fifth wife married by Muslim in presence of four legally-wedded wives and of paternity of children born out of fifth wife-Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question. Azizunnissa Khatoon v. Karimunnissa Khatun I L R 23 Cal. 130; Sayed Rashid Ahmad and another v. Mst. Anisa Khatun and others A I R 1932 P C 25 and Amir Ali's Muhammadan Law ref C. P. No. 336 of 1967 C. P. No. 370 of 1967
Judgment & Decree
S. A. RAHMAN, J.-This order will deal with two cross petitions for special leave to appeal, one on behalf of lftikhar Nazir Ahmad Khan and others and the other on behalf of Mst. Mehrun Nisa Begum, which aries out of the same case. Both the parties are apparently dissatisfied with the decision of the Courts below. The questions involved in the case relate to the status of the fifth wife, married by a Muslim male in the presence of four legally wedded wives and of the paternity of the children born out of the fifth wife. The High Court held that the marriage would only be fasid and not batil and therefore, the children would be entitled to share in the inheritance of the father, though the fifth wife would be excluded from such inheritance. The petitioners in Civil Petition No. 336 of 1967 who are represented by Mr. Mahmud Ali, contend that this findings is open to question on the basis of original authorities and specially Quranic injunctions on the subject. Mr. Mahmud Ali drew support for this contention from certain observations made in Azizunnissa Khatoon v. Karimunnissa Khatun (I L R 23 Cal. 130) and Salyid Rashid Ahmad and another v. Mst. Anisa Khatun and others (A I R 1932 P C 25). He suggested that the dictum covering this point, to be found in Amir Ali's Mohammadan Law, lays down the rule too widely in the cross petition submitted by Mst. Mehrun Nissa Begum it ;s represented by Mr. Shabir Ahtnad that the so-called fifth wife was really the fourth wife, as one of the previous wives had been divorced by the deceased husband, before he had married Mst. Mehrun Nissa and she was therefore, entitled to share in his inheritance. The questions raised are of public importance and may arise in other cases also. We grant leave to appeal in both the petitions. Petitioners in each case will furnish security in the sum of Rs. 1,000 for costs, prior to the appeal being set down for hearing. Petitions accepted. (I) I L R 23 Cal. 130 (2) A I R 1932 P C 25