| Case ID |
08e8f2e7-731e-4659-ac1a-58c1a52980d6 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
C.R. No. 233259 of 2018 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 30, 2020 |
| Hearing Date |
Jan 30, 2020 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the civil revision case on the grounds that the plaintiffs, who were the petitioners, failed to produce the original gift deed to substantiate their claim of inheritance. The court found that the defendants' claims regarding the alleged gift being forged were credible, and the statements made by the sisters in favor of the petitioners were deemed to be coerced and not representative of a lawful compromise. The court emphasized that for a compromise to be valid, it must be mutual and involve the intention to settle disputes, which was not present in this case. The court upheld the decisions of the lower courts, which had previously dismissed the suit due to lack of evidence and the public policy considerations surrounding relinquishments made by females in this context. |
| Summary |
In the case of C.R. No. 233259 of 2018 heard by the Lahore High Court, the primary issue revolved around inheritance rights and the validity of a purported gift deed claimed by the petitioners, Fazal Maqsood and others. The petitioners alleged that their father had gifted them the entire property, while the respondents, including MST. Naseem Begum, contended that the gift deed was forged. The court found that the petitioners did not present the original gift deed during the trial, which significantly undermined their position. The court also noted that statements made by the sisters in favor of the petitioners were obtained under duress and could not be considered a lawful compromise. The ruling highlighted important legal principles regarding inheritance and the necessity for clear, mutual agreements in cases of compromise. The decision reinforces the stance that agreements lacking mutual consent and intention are not enforceable in court. This case serves as a significant reference for future inheritance disputes and the requirements for valid compromises under the Civil Procedure Code. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
CH. MUHAMMAD MASOOD, JAHANGIR, JUSTICE
|
| Lawyers |
Syed Muhammad Kaleem Ahmed Khursheed,
Waris Ali,
Shehroz Tahir,
Muhammad Zubair Virk,
Muhammad Mehmood Chaudhry,
Muhammad Yasin Hatif
|
| Petitioners |
FAZAL MAQSOOD AND ANOTHERS
|
| Respondents |
MST. NASEEM BEGUM AND 3 OTHERS
|
| Citations |
2020 SLD 994,
2020 CLC 884
|
| Other Citations |
Syed Muhammad Ramzan v. Muslim Zaidi and 4 others PLD 1986 SC 66,
Mirza Muhammad Siddique v. Muhammad Abdullah 1989 MLD 54,
Mehran v. Settlement Commissioner (Lands), Multan, Additional Commissioner (Consolidation), Multan and 21 others 1994 CLC 1079,
Sh. Muhammad Fazil v. Sh. Abdul Qadir and 7 others 1997 CLC 243,
Muhammad Aslam and others v. Saleem ud Din and others 2006 CLC 1911,
Sardara and Allah Ditta through Legal Heirs and others v. Mst. Bashir Begum and another PLD 2016 Lah. 587,
Sh. Afzal Ahmad v. Ijaz Ahmad and others PLD 1975 Lah. 464,
H. Gharibullah v. Mst. Mumtaz Begum and others 1990 CLC 1609,
Khushi Muhammad and others v. Dost Muhammad and others 1997 CLC 1995,
Allah Wasaya and 5 others v. Irshad Ahmad and 4 others 1992 SCMR 2184,
Umar Din and another v. Muhammad Sadiq Hussain and 15 others 1993 SCMR 1089,
Muhammad Mansha and 7 others v. Abdul Sattar and 4 others 1995 SCMR 795,
Vir Singh and others v. Kharak Singh and others AIR 1925 Lah. 280,
Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1,
Umar Bakhsh and 2 others v. Azim Khan and 12 others 1993 SCMR 374,
Asifa Sultana v. Honest Traders, Lahore and another PLD 1970 SC 331
|
| Laws Involved |
Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
|
| Sections |
O.XXIII R.3
|