P L D 2021 Supreme Court 812
(a) Gift----
---Proof---Brothers depriving their sister of her share in inheritance through a purported gift of immoveable property made by their father---Witnesses were produced by the petitioners (brothers)/purported donees with regard to the purported gift and gift mutation, however both witnesses testified that they had no knowledge of the gift and also admitted that the purported donor (father of the parties) had never attended the offices of the concerned revenue department to record his statement; they had also contradicted themselves with regard to the gift mutation document as they testified that purported donor had thumb impressed it and mentioned the number of his national identity card thereon, but the said mutation document contained neither---Said witnesses did not assert that the purported donor had gifted the property in his lifetime---Respondent(sister)/plaintiff produced the death certificate of the father/purported donor which was issued by the concerned Union Council---Petitioners did not object to her producing the death certificate---Petitioners did not produce a contrary death certificate to establish that the purported donor was alive at the time the purported gift was made---Purported gift mutation was made after the death of the purported donor, who could not have gifted the property after his death---Supreme Court directed that the purported gift mutation was to be cancelled immediately, and that the concerned department shall promptly prepare the inheritance mutation of the deceased father of the parties and record the rights of his legal heirs in accordance with Muslim Personal Law and deliver possession to them as per their respective shares without further loss of time---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs throughout payable by the petitioners.
(b) Islamic law---
----Inheritance---Immediately on the death of a person, his/her legal heirs became owners of his estate under Islamic law.
(c) Islamic law---
----Inheritance---Legal heirs---Constructive possession of immoveable property ---Possession by an heir was considered to be constructive possession on behalf of all the heirs.
(d) Limitation Act (IX of 1908)---
----S. 3---Inheritance dispute between legal heirs over immoveable property---Filing of suit---Limitation---Cause of action, accrual of---Scope---Cause of action would only accrue when a legal heir was denied his/her rights, and it would be from such date that the time would start to run---Burden to establish this would lay on the defendant-legal heirs---However, law of limitation would be relevant when the conduct of the claimant-legal heir demonstrated acquiescence and particularly when third party interest was created in the inherited property.
.
(e) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 23, 24, 25(3), 34 & 38(a)---Inheritance rights of females---Practice of male legal heirs depriving their sisters of their share of inheritance---Observations recorded by the Supreme Court deprecating such practice.
In Pakistan, male heirs continued to deprive female heirs of their inheritance by resorting to different tactics and by employing dubious devices. The shares in the property of a deceased Muslim were prescribed in the Holy Quran and Shariah.
To deny an heir his/her share in the property left by the deceased was disobedience to Almighty Allah's decree and those who did so, while they may obtain a temporary benefit in this world, left themselves accountable to divine punishment in the Hereafter.
Despite the Supreme Court repeatedly pointing out (in its judgments) that effective measures must be put in place to protect the rights of inheritance of females, it had still not been done. Those few ladies who had the independence, determination and resources to take their brothers to court were left embroiled in slow grind litigation. The adage prevention was the best medicine was equally applicable when female rights were impaired. The State must ensure the protection of rights which was far easier, cheaper and less wasteful of public resources than restoring rights through the courts, which was laborious, expensive and needlessly wasteful of resources.
Constitution specifically protected property rights and enables the making of 'special provision for the protection of women and children' [Article 25(3) of the Constitution)]. Depriving females of their inheritance prescribed by Shariah violates the Principles of Policy set out in the Constitution. Denying females their inheritance also undermined their economic independence, prevented a rise in their standard of living and concentrates wealth in male descendants, which offended another three Principles of Policy [Article 38(a) of the Constitution)]. Economic deprivation of women prevented their full participation 'in all spheres of life' which was another Principle (Article 34 of the Constitution) which was violated.
(f) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Pt. II, Chaps. 1 & 2---Principles of Policy---Scope---Provisions relating to Fundamental Rights in the Constitution ought to be interpreted harmoniously with the Principles of Policy---Constitution required each organ or authority of the State to act in accordance with said Principles---Principles of Policy were the conscience of the Constitution and the basis of all executive and legislative action.
(g) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 29(3)---Principles of Policy---President and Governors to submit annual reports on the observance and implementation of the Principles of Policy---Scope---Such reports to be submitted by the President and Governors were a mandatory duty akin to a performance audit of the Government---When the required reports were not submitted by the President and the Governors respectively to the Parliament and the Provincial Assemblies, then these legislative bodies may not possess information which would help them to legislate where there were weaknesses and disparities---Supreme Court observed that it was expected that the President and the Governors shall fulfil their constitutional duty, in such regard, under Art. 29(3) of the Constitution.
0 Comments