MANZUR AHMAD and 7 others vs ABDUL KHALIQ and 7 others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a civil revision by the High Court in a dispute regarding inheritance rights in Evacuee Land Settlement. The petitioners, claiming to be the children of a predeceased son of a displaced person right-holder, sought a share in the inheritance. The lower courts denied relief, reasoning that the predecessor-in-interest died in 1950, prior to the promulgation of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, and that the Ordinance lacked retrospective effect, thereby excluding the petitioners from inheritance. The Supreme Court, upon hearing arguments regarding the applicability of the 1961 Ordinance and the nature of the property, granted leave to appeal. The Court identified the core legal questions as whether the petitioners are entitled to relief under the Rehabilitation Scheme given the evacuee nature of the property, and whether the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, read with connected laws, should be interpreted to allow the petitioners to inherit the estate. The Court determined that these issues, particularly the question of the Ordinance's retrospective application, required further examination.
- Whether the property being Evacuee land precludes the petitioners from claiming inheritance relief under paragraph 46 of the Rehabilitation Scheme?
- Whether the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 can be applied retrospectively to allow grandchildren to inherit the estate of a predecessor who died before the Ordinance's promulgation?
- Section 4, Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961
- Paragraph 46, Rehabilitation Scheme
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.--Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiffs in a suit regarding inheritance in a case of Evacuee Land Settlement against dismissal of their civil revision by the High Court.
2. ' The petitioners Nos.1 to 7 claim to be the children of Din Muhammad a predeceased son of Sardar Muhammad a displaced person right-holder. It appears that they were given the share, which as heirs they would have inherited in some land but were denied the same right in respect of other property. They were compelled to file the civil suit but without any success. It was held that Sardar Muhammad, having died on 27-8-1950, the Family Laws Ordinance promulgated on 15-7-1961 could not by virtue of section 4 thereof, be of any assistance to them.
3. ' An appeal before the District Court was not entertained and its memorandum was returned on account of jurisdictional evaluation. The High Court, having entertained a revision petition dismissed the same affirming the trial Court's view namely that the 1961 Ordinance being not retrospective, the petitioners were not entitled to any relief as grand-children of Sardar Muhammad.
4. ' After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners who has relied on Iqbal Mai v. Falak Sher PLD 1986 SC 228 and other judgments of the superior Courts and the learned counsel for the respoadents, who has cited Muhammad Ali v. Abdul Aziz 1980 S CM R 267 we consider it a fit and proper case to grant leave to appeal inter alia to examine the following questions:--
(a) Whether the property, being Evacuee, the petitioners would not be entitled to the relief claimed, by virtue of para.46 of the Rehabilitation Scheme;
(b) Whether the Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 read with other connected laws would not be given such effect so as to entitle the petitioners in this case to inherit the estate left by Sardar Muhammad.
5. ' In this context the question of retrospectively would also need reexamination.
6. ' Leave to appeal, is accordingly granted. Security Rupees 5,000.
7. ' The appeal shall be prepared on the present record with direction to the parties to file all necessary documents.
8. ' Stay order dated 10-10-1984 to continue meanwhile.