1983CLC3134 (PLP)
Mss. FOORAN — Petitioner Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS — Respondents
| Citation | 1983CLC3134 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Karam Elahee Chauhan, J |
| Parties | Mss. FOORAN — Petitioner Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Muslim Personal Laws (S6ariat Application) Act (V of 1962) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983CLC3134 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Muslim Personal Laws (S6ariat Application) Act (V of 1962) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983CLC3134 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Karam Elahee Chauhan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983CLC3134 (PLP) (Mss. FOORAN — Petitioner Versus MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE AND OTHERS — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nveed Shehryar for Petitioner.
- Iqbal. Ahmad for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 22nd March, 1977.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 3-Punjab Muslim Persona Law (Shariat) Application (Re moval of Doubts) Act (XXV of 1975), S. 3-Succession-Female holding limited estate, held, entitled only to get fractional share in land of last male holder-Claim of such female to have whole land to exclusion of collaterals cannot be accepted--Petition dismissed-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199.
Judgment & Decree
S. 3-Punjab Muslim Persona Law (Shariat) Application (Re moval of Doubts) Act (XXV of 1975), S. 3-Succession-Female holding limited estate, held, entitled only to get fractional share in land of last male holder-Claim of such female to have whole land to exclusion of collaterals cannot be accepted--Petition dismissed-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199. Nveed Shehryar for Petitioner. Iqbal. Ahmad for Respondents. Date of hearing : 22nd March, 1977. The petitioner as a widow of one Sondha Khan filed a claim form bearing No. 290 for land left by her in India. The claim was verified and Ford-Haqiyat was consequently issued in her favour on the basis whereof land in the Chak in dispute was allotted to her somewhere in 1955. Res pondents Nos. 2 to 10 who claim to be the collaterals of Sondha Khan filed an application before the Assistant Collector pleading that Mst. Fooran petitioner was only a limited owner under custom and her estate stood abolished by the West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Appli cation) Act 7 of 1968, therefore, she was eligible only to a share of 1/4th in the estate of her late husband and that the remaining area should be given to them. This prayer was accepted and a mutation bearing No. 106 was entered on 7th February, 1966 and was relatively sanctioned in favour of the said respondents on 16th September, 1968. The petitioner Mst. Fooran filed an appeal before the Collector but without any success as the same was rejected on l lib February, 1966. The petitioner filed a revision which succeeded and was accepted by the learned Additional Commissioner, Multan on 9th June, 1966 and the entire land was allowed to remain with her. Respondents Nos. 2 to 10 thereafter filed second revision before the learned Member, Board of Revenue, West Pakistan, which was accepted on 19th June, 1967 whereby the collaterals were also allowed to have their share in the land in dispute. Mst. Fooran, petitioner, has come up in writ petition against the aforesaid proceedings and orders to this Court. 2. By means of Punjab Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application (Removal of Doubts) Act XXV of 1975 the law has been made uniform and the limited estate held by female who held land in India under custom have all been terminated with the result that the females con cerned are entitled only to get their fractional share in the land of the last male holder. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition has become infructuous, inasmuch as the claim of Mst. Fooran to have the whole of the land to the exclusion of the collaterals cannot be accepted. The writ petition consequently is dismissed with no order to costs. M. A. K. Petition dismissed.