LAHORE:
The Superior Court of Lahore (LHC) has restored the inheritance rights of three sisters after 38 years, canceling a controversial Tamleek (gift mutation) that his brother had used to deprive them fraudulently of their legal participation in his father’s property.
Judge Malik Javed Iqbal Wain of the Fine Bank of LHC ruled that the Tamleek mutation, executed on June 28, 1987, was not valid. The Court rejected the claim of defendant Abdul Sattar that his late father had given him 33 biggas and some lands of land for “love and affection.”
Abdul Sattar said the transfer was made while his father had good health, and that he had obtained the verbal consent of his sisters three or four months before the transaction. He also said that the possession of the Earth was given to him at the time of the mutation.
Read: ‘Property can be verbally endowed’
However, the court found no written consent evidence or any testimony of independent witnesses to support the claims of offer, acceptance or delivery of possession.
Justice observed that the justification provided, disinheriting daughters for love and affection for the Son, was “seriously questionable.” He added that even if the intention behind Tamleek was described as pious, “it is inconceivable how daughters deprived of their mandatory inheritance of Sharia could be treated as an act of virtue.”
In addition, he pointed out: “The Sacred Koran unequivocally guarantees the rights of the daughters in his father’s heritage. Any attempt to defeat this divine commandment through a doubtful transaction is not legally sustainable.”
Justice Wain strongly criticized the contradictory findings of the Court of Appeals that indicated that the Court of Appeals had affirmed in paragraph N9 of its judgment that the Court of First Instance correctly considered the alleged gift of invalid donation.
Judge Malik Javed Iqbal Wins observed that the Court of Appeals initially said that Abdul Sattar (accused No. 1) could not prove the essential elements of a valid gift (Tamleek), but then inexplicably reversed that conclusion in paragraph n. ° 10 When revoking the conclusions of the Court of First Instance on Issue n. ° 2, without offering any new evidence or legal justification.
The Sacred Koran unequivocally guarantees the rights of the daughters in his father’s heritage. Any attempt to defeat this divine commandment through a doubtful transaction is not legally sustainable.
Judge Malik Javed Iqbal Wins
“This contradictory approach is obviously unsustainable in the law,” said Justice. “It is an established principle that once a court has conclusively affirmed an objective finding on a material issue, particularly related to the validity of the main transaction, cannot, without legal justification or convincing reasons, represent a subsequent finding that directly denies its own previous conclusion.”
The judge ruled that such internal inconsistency was equivalent to “a bad reading and not reading evidence”, which resulted in a spontaneous abortion of justice that justified the intervention under the revision jurisdiction of the court.
Tamleek disputed
Justice Weins also pointed out that Sattar, even in his written statement, could not specify the date, time, place or witnesses for the supposed offer, acceptance and delivery of possession, nuclei ingredients of a valid Tamleek.
“These fundamental omissions put seriously the authenticity of the alleged Tamleek and make the claim of the legally unsustainable Done,” he ruled.
He added that the Court of Appeals revoked the well -reasoned conclusions of the Court of First Instance without assigning solid or convincing reasons. “The minor inconsistencies in the evidence of the petitioner do not exceed the defendant’s complete failure to prove the central ingredients of a valid gift,” the justice concluded.
Read more: Women locked in inheritance claims
According to the petition, the parties are legal heirs of Ashraf Ali (deceased). The petitioner, Rasheedan, along with Shakoori and Shakila, alleged that his brother, Abdul Sattar, fraudulently executed the Tamleek NO1874 mutation on June 28, 1987, during his father’s illness, to deprive them of their legal and Islamic heritage.
The plaintiff declared that Ashraf Ali was paralyzed and unable to speak, listen or walk at that time. In addition, he claimed that the mutation was attested with the collusion of income officials, using a false impression of the thumb in the Rapat Roznamcha Waqaiti, an entry into the daily newspaper of the events maintained by the Patwari to maintain records of notable incidents on land issues that include natural disasters, transactions belonging to land, mutations, gifts, gifts and more.
The Court of First Instance initially ruled in favor of the sisters, but the Court of Appeals then revoked that decision and failed in favor of Abdul Sattar.
Then, the sisters appealed to LHC, who restored the conclusions of the Court of First Instance, declared the void of the Tamleek mutation and restored the participation of the sisters in the inheritance.
