👋 Welcome, visitor from Columbus, US!

41/2019 M.A. Roshan Ara and others Thr. Yasir Ali Palijo (Appellant) V/S Abdul Karim and others (Respondent)

Sindh High CourtSuccession & Inheritance2020

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author)

Share on WhatsApp

41/2019 M.A. Roshan Ara and others Thr. Yasir Ali Palijo (Appellant) V/S Abdul Karim and others (Respondent) Sindh High Court

Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar(Author) Order Date: 03-MAR-20

Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925) --- ----Ss. 372, 373 & 295---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 85 & 128---Specific Relief Act (I of 1877), S. 42---Succession certificate, issuance of---Public document---Presumption of truth---Legitimacy of a child---Proof---DNA test, conducting of---Respondents being sisters of deceased filed application for conducting DNA test of minor son of deceased with the contention that he was adopted son and was not entitled for inheritance---Petition for conducting DNA test and objections were dismissed and succession certificate was issued in favour of petitioners---Validity---Documents produced on behalf of petitioners were official which had not been disputed by the respondents---Respondents should have sought declaration and cancellation of said documents before raising objections to the legal status of minor after death of his mother---Legitimacy of a child or his status as son of deceased could not be disproved by any oral evidence as against documentary evidence from official record which was a public document---Civil Court in presence of documentary evidence could not hold that the child was not born from the marriage of the parties---Father, in the present case, had not challenged that deceased was not mother of the minor son---Respondents had failed to challenge or rebut the evidence of official record of National Database and Registration Authority and other evidence before the Trial Court---DNA test could not be a sole proof of paternity of a child---Trial Court had rightly refused request of respondents for conducting DNA test, in circumstances---Respondents had made a frivolous challenge to the paternity of a child to deprive him from inheritances---Appeal was dismissed in, circumstances. 2012 YLR 1752 distinguished. Mst. Laila Qayyum v. Fawad Qayum and others PLD 2019 SC 449; Salman Akram Raja v. Government of Punjab 2013 SCMR 203 and Ghazala Tehsin Zohra v. Ghulam Dastagir Khan PLD 2015 SC 327 rel.

Full judgment text for this case is not yet available on Pakistan Law Reports. Check the official Sindh High Court case law portal for the complete order.
This judgment is reproduced from a publicly available source for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. If you believe this listing contains an error, let us know.

Related judgments

Judgment on Punjab Partition of Immovable Property Act 2012

PLJ 2023 Karachi 124 (DB) · Sindh High Court · 2023

International Lawyer Law Firm

PLJ 2011 Karachi 88 · Sindh High Court · 2011

Validity of Gift under the law

PLJ 2009 Karachi 222 · Sindh High Court · 2009

Case in which defendant is not made party in Appeal

PLJ 1998 Karachi 289 · Sindh High Court · 1998

Application to make legal heirs party to the suit

PLJ 1996 Karachi 353 · Sindh High Court · 1996