1990 PLP 881 (SCMR)
SANAM JAN KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. NOOR BEGUM and 7 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 881 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zillah, Nasim Hasan Shah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ |
| Parties | SANAM JAN KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. NOOR BEGUM and 7 others‑‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 881 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 881 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zillah, Nasim Hasan Shah and S. Usman Ali Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 881 (SCMR) (SANAM JAN KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. NOOR BEGUM and 7 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. A. Waheed Saleem Senior Advocate Supreme Court with MA. Farani, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on -Record for Appellant.
- Maulvi Sirajul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos.3 to 7.
Judgment & Decree
The joint holders were husband and wife. The husband died. His heirs, including the appellant wanted to have the account‑share in the amounts and the profits etc. in accordance with Islamic law of inheritance while the respondent No.1, the other joint‑holder of the account, the widow of the deceased claimed exclusive right in this behalf on several grounds, including what her learned counsel stated, that the amount is in lieu of her dower. The learned Civil Judge granted the Certificate to the appellant to the extent of his assumed Islamic share. The appeal filed by the respondents side in the High Court succeeded on the ground that the case involved disputed questions of fact and law and it should have been decided as a suit. On direct appeal one of us (Dr. Nasim Hasan Shah, J.) by an interim order dated 30th August, 1989, issued notice and in the meanwhile directed that the operation of the order of the High Court shall remain suspended. Today some arguments were addressed on the merits of the prima facie case of either side during which the following case‑law was also referred:‑‑ (i) Ch. Habibullah v. Sheikhupura Central Co‑Operative Bank Ltd. PLD 1987 SC 53. (ii) Amtul Habib v. Musarrat Parveen PLD 1974 SC 185. (iii) Mirza Muhammad Amin etc. v. Government of Pakistan PLD 1982 F.S.C. 143. (iv) Guran Ditta and another v. T. Ram Ditta AIR 1928 Privy Council
172. However, after some discussion the parties agreed; firstly, that the main appeal be decided; and secondly, that it should be allowed with the following agreed order:‑‑ "The parties agree that the appeal be finally decided declaring that one half (1/2) of the amount i.e. Rs.1,50,000 with interest (profits) be received by Mst. Noor Begum widow of Aspeen Gul deceased and rest of the amount of Rs.1,50,000 be divided as follows:‑‑ (i) 1/4th share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Mst. Noor Begum (Respondent No.1) (ii) 1/4th share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Mohammad Akram (Respondent No.2) (iii) 1/2 share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Sanam Jan Khan (Appellant)." Accordingly this appeal is partly allowed in the terms afore‑recorded. There shall be no order as to costs. AA./S‑474/S Order accordingly.