| Case ID |
f5ec3e0f-a116-421c-adec-9b9ba7c0e0bc |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
First Appeal No. 54 of 1951 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 21, 1954 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the appeal filed by Safi Ullah challenging the validity of gifts made by his father, Maulvi Nazir Husain, during his lifetime. The court ruled that the gifts were valid under Muhammadan Law, emphasizing the absolute power of a Muslim to alienate his property. The court found no evidence supporting claims that the gifts were made under duress of impending death, as the donor had been ill for an extended period but retained mental capacity and acted of his own free will. The court also clarified that a gift made in favor of some heirs does not invalidate the gift unless it is established that the intention was solely to disinherit other heirs. The decision reinforced the principle that intention and actual delivery of possession are crucial for validating gifts under Muslim law. |
| Summary |
The case of Safi Ullah vs. Ghulam Jabbar revolves around the validity of gifts made under Muhammadan Law. The Lahore High Court addressed the implications of gifts made to certain heirs, ruling that such gifts are permissible if not intended to disinherit others. The court meticulously analyzed the conditions under which gifts can be rendered invalid, particularly focusing on the donor's mental state and the circumstances surrounding the gift. The court found that Maulvi Nazir Husain, the donor, had executed the gifts with full understanding and intention, despite his long-standing illness. This case underscores the complexities of property rights under Islamic law, particularly regarding the alienation of property by a Muslim. The ruling is significant for legal practitioners and scholars interested in inheritance laws and property rights, providing clarity on the nuances of gift validity and the donor's intentions. Keywords such as 'Muhammadan Law', 'gift validity', 'property rights', and 'inheritance laws' are essential for legal research and SEO optimization in legal contexts. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
B. Z. Kaikaus,
Akhlaque Husain
|
| Lawyers |
Siraj-aid-Din Ahmad,
Iftikhar-ul-Haq Khan,
Saleem Mazhar
|
| Petitioners |
Safi Ullah
|
| Respondents |
Muhammad Ashraf,
Ghulam Jabbar,
Mst. Said Begum,
Mst. Asmat Ara,
Mst. Safia Pak Teenat
|
| Citations |
1955 SLD 77,
1955 PLD 191
|
| Other Citations |
Nawab Umjad Ally Khan v. Mst. Mohumdee Begum, 11 Moore's Ind. App. 517,
Ahmad Khan v. Mst. Zamroot Jan, A I R 1950 Pesh. 11,
Hassarat Bibi v. Golam Jaffar 3 C W N 57,
Abdul Ahad Khan v. Ahmad Nawaz Khan I L R 12 Lab. 683,
Jahan Khan v. Feroz Pak L R 1951 Lab. 693=P L D 1951 Lab. 433,
Ibrahim Goolam Arif v. Saiboo I L R 35 Cal. 1,
Mst. Sakina Begum v. Khalifa Hafz-ud-Din A I R 1941 Lab: 58,
Hafiz Karim Bakhsh v. Mst. Begum Jan 52 P R 1895
|
| Laws Involved |
Muhammadan Law
|
| Sections |
Not available
|