ALLAH WASAYA Versus RAHIM BAKHSH

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.-- -Leave to appeal has been, sought by the defendants' side; against the dismissal by the High Court, of their Civil Revision. It had arisen out of a declaratory inheritance suit. The petitioners have lost throughout.

2. Learned counsel while accepting that on merits the impugned judgment would not be liable to be set aside if Muslim law of inheritance is kept in view, however, vehemently contended that the respondents' suit should have been dismissed because on account of influx of time the title with regard to the suit land matured in favour of the petitioners on account of adverse possession. He relied on the following statement made by one of the respondents before the trial Court:--

3. Even if the question raised by the learned counsel is held to be entertainable, the so-called admission made by one of the respondents will be of no assistance to the petitioners. The respondents' side is co-sharer and could not be held to have lost their title or remedy on account of influx of time -- nor it is a case of ouster. See judgment of this Court in `Ghulam Ali and 2 others v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi' C.P.-133-R of 1989 decided on 15-5-1989. No other point having been pressed this petition, accordingly is liable to be dismissed.

4. Before closing this order it needs to be noticed that the learned counsel did not press this petition, against respondent No.2, on account of certain developments which, as stated by him, took place during the pendency of the litigation. Accordingly while this petition is dismissed on merits in so far as the respondent No.l is concerned but dismissed as not pressed as regards the respondent No.2.

5. AA./A-661/S Petition dismissed.