Agha ABDUL HAMEED and 7 others vs Mst. NASEEM BEGUM
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court judgment that dismissed a Civil Revision regarding the distribution of compensation money paid following the death of one Abdul Ghafoor in Saudi Arabia. The High Court had ruled that the respondent, the widow of the deceased, was entitled to the entire amount exclusively, based on an entry designating her as the beneficiary. The petitioners, representing other heirs, challenged this, arguing the funds should be distributed according to Islamic law. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether there was sufficient material to determine the conditions of the payment, whether the High Court erred in failing to call for additional evidence, and whether the respondent held the funds as a trustee for all heirs. The Court further sought to determine if the compensation amount was liable to be distributed among all legal heirs under Muslim Law of inheritance. The Supreme Court granted the leave to appeal and permitted the petitioners to file additional fresh material for consideration.
- Whether the High Court erred in failing to call for additional evidence to determine the conditions of a compensation payment?
- Whether a widow receiving compensation for a deceased spouse holds the funds as a trustee for all legal heirs?
- Whether compensation money paid upon the death of an individual is liable to be distributed among all heirs in accordance with Muslim Law of inheritance?
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought; against the dismissal by the High Court, of a Civil Revision. It had arisen out of a succession certificate regarding one Abdul Ghafoor deceased who met with an accident in S. Arabia and expired there.
2. The amount in question was paid to the respondent, a widow of Abdul Ghafoor, who has been held to be entitled to appropriate it exclusively as her own property, without sharing it with other heirs, in accordance with the Islamic law. The petitioners side represents them. No doubt it is correct that as observed by the High Court nothing was before the learned Courts below to give final verdict on the terms and conditions of the contract under which the amount was paid as compensation (or otherwise) regarding the death of Abdul Ghafoor.
3. The High Court, however, relied on an entry showing Mst. Naseem Begum as an heir/beneficiary, therefore, in absence of any other material it was thought that she was entitled exclusively to appropriate the entire amount.
After hearing the learned counsel we consider this case fit for grant of leave to examine; whether, there was absolutely no material available to help discover the conditions relating to the payment in question; ' If not whether, additional evidence should not have been called for; and, whether it should not be called for now.
4. If ultimately the position remains as assumed by the High Court, A whether the respondent was not a trustee when receiving the amount, on behalf of all heirs including herself.
' And lastly; whether, in the circumstances of this case the amount in question was not liable to be distributed amongst all the heirs of Abdul Ghafoor in accordance with the Muslim Law of inheritance.
' Leave to appeal, accordingly, is granted. Security Rs,5,000.
5. Oral request of the learned counsel for the petitioners for filing of additional fresh material, if available, (which was not before the Courts) is allowed. The material shall be placed on the file after due notice to the other side.