MUHAMMAD KHAN Versus ROSHNAI

ORDER

1. JAVAID IQBAL, J.- - Leave to appeal is being sought against the judgment and decree of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court Lahore dated 19th November, 1979 passed in RFA No.155 of 1960.

2. The pedigree-table of the parties is given in para 1 of the impugned judgment and need not be reproduced here. Briefly the facts are that Rahman deceased (died in 1940) had landed property in two villages. In village Tikha he had about 3,590 Kanals and in village Gijiana he had about 137 Kanals. The said Rahman had two wives, one Mst. Bhagan who died before Rahman's death and from her he had two daughters namely Mst. Mehran who had also died, and Mst. Roshanai respondent No.l. The other wife was Mst. Rai Bibi who had been murdered and from her Rahman had two daughters also namely Mst. Bibi who was not party to the suit and Mst. Madan who died in .1953. The present petitioner is collateral of Rahman. Mst. Roshanai respondent No.l instituted a suit in 1958 claiming that after the death of Mst. Madan out of the total landed property belonging to her father Rahman she was entitled to inherit 5/8th share as heir of Rahman. The position before she filed the suit was thus: About 137 Kanals of land in village Gijiana stood mutated in favour of Mst Madan and after the death of Mst. Raj Bibi who was a limited owner about 3,590 Kanals of land situated in village Tikha stood mutated in favour of the reversionary. The suit filed by Mst. Roshanai respondent No.l was decreed in her favour on 19th September 1960 to the extent of 5/12th share in the entire property. The reasoning of the Administrative Civil Judge, First Class, Sheikhupura was that on the death of Mst. Madan the property reverted to Rahman and was to be distributed among his surviving heirs. Rahman had four daughters and wife Mst. Raj Bibi. Four daughters would get 2/3rd share and Mst. Raj Bibi 1/8th share, the remaining to go to the reversionary. But at the time of the filing of the suit Mst. Mehran and Mst. Madan as well as Mst. Bibi were dead and they had left no issue. Consequently Mst. Roshanai respondent No.l was entitled to inherit 1/2 share out of the share of each of her sisters and in this way her share would come to 5/12. The present petitioner challenged the aforesaid judgment and decree in appeal i.e. RFA No.155 of 1960 which was decided on 19th November 1979 by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore. The appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and a slight increase was made in the share of Mst. Roshanai respondent No. l which was modified to the extent of 817/1728.

3. We have made recalculations of the share of Mst. Roshanai respondent No.l with the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. If she was entitled to inherit 1/2 share of the total landed property from her father she was also entitled to inherit 1/8th share there under belonging to her mother Mst. Raj Bibi. In other words the total of her share would come to the same extent which had been decreed in her favour.

4. Consequently, in our view no interference is called for. The result is that this petition has no force and is accordingly dismissed.

5. M.I. /M-203/S. Petition dismissed