Mst. RUKHSANA BIBI And Others vs LAL HUSSAIN And Other
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' civil revision regarding an inheritance dispute. The core legal question was whether the High Court and the appellate court erred in their concurrent findings of fact regarding the religious sect of the deceased last owner, Nazar Hussain, which directly impacted the inheritance distribution. The petitioners contended that the lower courts misread the evidence, specifically regarding the deceased's donations to Shia causes, his attendance at Majalis, and the performance of his funeral rites. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts were unexceptionable. The Court found no evidence of misreading or non-reading of the record, nor any legal infirmity or violation of principle in the lower courts' determinations. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal, affirming that findings of fact supported by the record are not subject to interference in the absence of demonstrable legal error or misappreciation of evidence.
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in the absence of misreading or non-reading of evidence?
- Does the performance of religious rites or donations to specific religious causes conclusively determine the sect of a deceased person for inheritance purposes?
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the plaintiffs side against the dismissal by the High Court of their civil revision which had arisen out of suit relating to inheritance.
2. The petitioners' suit was decreed; but the respondents' appeal having been allowed on a finding of fact that Nazar Hussain deceased last owner was a Sunni, the petitioners' civil revision was also dismissed by the High Court on affirmation of the said finding of fact.
3. Learned counsel has contended that the impugned judgment and the findings of fact affirmed therein are based on misreading of evidence. When questioned as to what are those items of evidence which have been misread, learned counsel could not point out any specific parts of the evidence. He, however, contended that the deceased used to give donation for Shia causes and also used to attend their Majalis. He also stated that the controversy relating to the performance of funeral ceremony whether in accordance with the Shia rites or the Sunni rites has also not been properly resolved.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners in support of this petition and the point raised by him we are of the view that the findings of fact rendered all against the petitioners by the two higher Courts, notwithstanding the acceptance of their plea by the lower Court, are unexceptionable. No infirmity legal or of principle having been discovered nor there being any misreading or non-reading, we do not find any justification for interference. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused.
Cited by 2 cases
- GHULAM SHABBIR and others vs Mst. BAKHAT KHATOON and others 2009 SCMR 644
- GHULAM SHABBIR, etc. vs Mst. BAKHAT KHATOON, etc_ 2009 PLJ SC 410