| Case ID |
00e41b53-5dc2-44dd-8d42-a7c69d308fff |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petition No. 19849 of 1998 |
| Decision Date |
Feb 15, 1999 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court upheld the trial court's decision to refuse the attachment of property purchased and owned by the legal heirs of the debtor. The court found that legal representatives could be sued and had their property attached to the extent of the deceased's property only if they had inherited or possessed any such property. Since no heirs had proven ownership or possession of the property in question, the attachment was deemed invalid. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Col. (R.) Sadiq Hassan Shaikh vs Tassadaq Humayun and 6 others, adjudicated by the Lahore High Court on February 15, 1999, the court addressed critical issues surrounding the attachment of assets purchased and owned by the legal heirs of a deceased debtor. The petitioner, represented by M. Sharif Chohan, sought the attachment of properties owned by the deceased's legal heirs, asserting that such properties were duly purchased by the heirs and should be subject to attachment under the Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908) sections S.50, O.XXI, and R.58, as well as Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973). The respondents, represented by M. Iqbal, contested the attachment on the grounds that no legal heirs had inherited or possessed any property from the deceased, thereby negating their status as legal representatives capable of having decrees executed against their assets. The trial court initially dismissed the petition based on Section 10 of the Money Lenders Ordinance, 1960, leading to appeals and subsequent proceedings that ultimately resulted in the refusal to execute the attachment. Citing precedent from cases such as Karan Singh v. Ram Sahai and another AIR 1941 All. 41 and Messrs Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan v. Mst. Roqaiya Begum and others 1986 CLC 1592, the court emphasized the necessity of establishing legal ownership or possession of properties by heirs before enforcing decrees against them. The decision underscored the importance of verifying legal representations and ownership claims in constitutional petitions involving the attachment and execution of property against legal heirs, ensuring that decrees are only enforced to the extent of the deceased's actual property possession. This case stands as a significant reference in Pakistani jurisprudence, highlighting the interplay between civil procedure codes and constitutional mandates in property attachment cases involving deceased debtors and their legal heirs. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan
|
| Judges |
GHULAM MAHMOOD QURESHI, J
|
| Lawyers |
M. Sharif Chohan,
M. Iqbal
|
| Petitioners |
Col. (R.) SADIQ HASSAN SHAIKH
|
| Respondents |
6 others,
TASSADAQ HUMAYUN
|
| Citations |
1999 SLD 956,
1999 CLC 1244
|
| Other Citations |
Karan Singh v. Ram Sahai and another AIR 1941 All. 41,
Muthiah Chetti v. Palaniappa Chetti and others AIR 1928 PC 139,
Mahomed Mohideen Pillai Tara and another v. Animal AIR 1939 Mad. 793,
Lachhman Singh v. Firm Dasuandhi Ram Babu Ram AIR 1938 Lah. 16,
Jodh Singh v. Nizam Din and another AIR 1930-Lah. 332,
Messrs Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan v. Mst. Roqaiya Begum and others 1986 CLC 1592 ref.
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
S.50,
O.XXI,
R.58,
Art.199
|