JAVAID IQBAL vs MAOSOODAN BIBI and 4 others
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court judgment that dismissed a Civil Revision in a suit for declaration regarding the inheritance of the estate of the deceased, Muhammad Din. The core legal questions involved the applicability of the principle of estoppel and the factual findings regarding possession of the land and the genuineness of a will executed by the deceased in favour of the plaintiff, Mst. Maqsoodan Bibi. The petitioner, a vendee from the deceased's nephews, challenged the lower courts' findings. The Supreme Court held that the principle of estoppel, as discussed in the cited precedent, was not applicable to the facts of the present case. Furthermore, the Court affirmed the findings of fact made by the appellate court regarding the validity of the will, noting that it was not unusual for the deceased to bequeath property to his wife's daughter, who was also his brother's daughter. Consequently, the Court found no justification for granting leave to appeal and dismissed the petition.
- Does the principle of estoppel apply to a claim of title based on a will where the claimant is the step-daughter of the deceased?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with findings of fact regarding the genuineness of a will that have been concluded by the appellate court?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by a defendant in a suit for declaration relating to the devolution of the estate of one Muhammad Din deceased; against dismissal by the High Court of his Civil Revision.
2. ' It is stated that the mutation of inheritance of the deceased was sanctioned in favour of the respondents side--a widow (respondent No,2) and three paternal nephews (respondents Nos.3 to 5). The petitioner is stated to be vendee from the nephews. Respondent No,1 Mst.Maqsoodan Bibi the plaintiff in this case sought declaration, as stated by the learned counsel claiming title on the basis of a gift. She withdrew the suit with permission to refile. When instituted afresh, the learned counsel further stated, the claim was this time based on a 'will' said to have been executed by the deceased in her favour.
3. ' The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed; mainly, on the ground of bar of estoppel and question relating to possession over the land. Her appeal succeeded. Both the questions regarding estoppel and possession were decided against the petitioner. His Civil Revision also failed in the High Court, therefore, now leave to appeal is sought.
4. ' Learned counsel has read a passage from the judgment of this Court Haji Ghulam Rasool and others v. The Chief Administrator of Auqaf PLD 1971 SC 376 which relates to the principle of estoppel. The same authority was cited in the High Court and we agree with the analysis and observations made in the impugned judgment indicating that the said authority is not attracted to the present case. Learned counsel also raised the question of genuineness of the will which a learned Judge in the High Court rightly observed stood concluded in favour of Mst.Maqsoodan Bibi through findings of fact rendered by the learned appeal Court. We may add here that as admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mst.Rabia Bibi (respondent No,2) was originally married to Shah Muhammad father of Mst.Maqsoodan Bibi and a brother of Muhammad Din deceased. After the death of Shah Muhammad Mst.Rabia Bibi married Muhammad Din. Thus before the death of Muhammad Din Mst.Maqsoodan Bibi was enjoying the status of the Pichhlag' daughter of Rabia Bibi. In these circumstances it is neither unusual nor unexpected that Muhammad Din could have made a will in favour of Pichhlag' daugher of his wife - the beneficiary being also the real daughter of his real brother.
5. ' In the light of what has been stated above we find no justification for grant of leave to appeal.
6. ' The same is refused.