2023 Y L R 54
[Balochistan]
Before Abdullah Baloch, J
ABDUL GHAFFAR--- Petitioner
Versus
FAIZI BIBI and 2 others ---Respondents
Civil Revision No. 288 of 2020, decided on 6th December, 2021.
Succession Act (XXXIX of 1925) ---
----S.272---Succession certificate---Tarka--- Islamic law --- Deceased/government servant
(issueless) was martyred during service and Government declared him Shahaeed and
announced compensation amount for his legal heirs ---Petitioner (brother/legal heir of the
deceased/servant) filed suit against respondents (mother and two brothers of the deceased)
that they had obtained succession certificate without impleading the petitioner as legal heir in the succession application and received the compensation amount accordingly---Suit was decreed by Civil Court, but the same was set aside by the appellate/District Court ---Validity -
--Amount of compensation did not fall within the parameters of a Tarka, thus, no one could claim the same as matter of legitimate right---Revision petition was dismissed accordingly.
Wafaqi Hakoomat -e-Pakistan v. Awamunnas PLD 1991 SC 731; PLD 1991 SC 750
and Dr. Safdar Hussain and another v. Flt. Lt. Nadia Latif and others 2014 YLR 1553 rel.
Syed Manzoor Ahmed Shah and Mubasshir Hussan for Petitioner.
Muhammad Umar Doger for Respondents.
Saifullah Sanjarani, Assistant A.G. for the State.
Date of hearing: 23rd November, 2021.
JUDGMENT
ABDULLAH BALOCH, J .---This petition is directed against the judgment and
decree dated 6th August 2020 ("the impugned judgment and decree") passed by the learned
Additional District Judge -VII, Quetta ("the appellate Court") whereby appeal filed by the
respondents was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 31st March 2018 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge -I, Quetta ("the trial Court") was set aside.
2. Brief facts arising out from the instant petition are that petitioner/plaintiff and
respondents Nos.1 to 3 are the legal heirs of late Din Muhammad, who was employee in
Balochistan Traffic Police and died on 6th September 2010 due to strike by a vehicle near Airport Road, Quetta. While on 14th February 2011 the respondents/defendants obtained Succession Certificate without impleading the petitioner/plaintiff as legal heir in the
Succession Application. Besides, the Government of Balochistan announced compensation
amount of Rs.20,00,000/ - for the legal heirs of deceased Din Muhammad. Thus, the
petitioner/plaintiff being real brother of deceased is also entitled to receive his respective share from the compensatory amount Rs.20,00,000/ -.
3. The suit of the plaintiff/petitioner was contested by the defendants/ respondents by
means of filing written statement. After framing issues and recording evidence, the suit of plaintiff/ petitioner was decreed in his favour; vide impugned judgment and decree dated 31st March 2018.
4. Being aggrieved the respondents/ appellants assailed the judgment and decree passed
by the learned trial Court before the learned appellate Court by filing appeal, which was allowed, vide impugned judgment and decree as mentioned hereinabove in para No. 1; whereby the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court was set aside. Whereafter the petitioner filed the instant Civil Revision Petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record minutely, which
reveals that the petitioner mainly filed the suit for receiving his share from the compensation amount awarded for his deceased brother, who being police personnel was martyred issueless during the course of service. As the Government of Balochistan declared the late Din Muhammad as Shaheed and announced Rs.20,00,000/ - for his legal heirs. Since the deceased
was issueless, thus his mother and two brothers obtained succession certificate in pursuance whereof received the said compensation amount.
6. Now question arises whether the amount of compensation, grant in aid pertains to
Tarka left by the deceased Din Muhammad or otherwise and the legal heirs of deceased are entitled to receive Tarka of immoveable and moveable property left by the deceased. With regard to Tarka the Hon'ble Shariat Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan passed an exhaustive landmark judgment; wherein provided guidelines for matters pertaining to Tarka. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case of "Wafaqi Hakoomat -e-Pakistan v.
Awamunnas PLD 1991 SC 731 held as under:
Likewise, the same view was also taken by the Hon'ble Shariat Appellate Bench of
the Supreme Court of Pakistan in case of PLD 1991 SC 750 wherein held as under:
Following the aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court
the Hon'ble Lahore High Court in its judgment in the case of "Dr. Safdar Hussain and
another v. Flt. Lt. Nadia Latif and others 2014 YLR 1553", held as under:
"8. Tarka/estate of the deceased consists of the immovable or movable properties, moneys and all other articles which he owned and over which he had complete control and dominion so as to enter into the transaction of sale, exchange, transfer, gift in respect of such immovable and movable properties, moneys and other goods/articles. In the light of above, it is settled that an amount which has accrued to an employee
during his lifetime, whether he has received the same or not before his death, shall becom e part of the estate of the deceased and such amount had to be distributed
among the legal heirs of the employee, as per the Personnel Law of the employee, after his death. In case an amount has accrued after his death then it is required to be
seen, in the light of interpretation given by the Shariat Appellate Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, whether the said amount falls in the category of Tarka/estate of the deceased or not. If the amount accrued is a "grant" or "concession" then the same will be payable to the nominee of the deceased, irrespective of the fact that the Personnel Law of the deceased states otherwise.
9. The amount of Group Welfare Scheme could not be claimed by the deceased during
his lifetime nor the deceased could ask respondent No. 6 for payment under the said
head which would go to establish that deceased had power or authority to possess or
claim any amount under the aforesaid head during his lifetime. This amount would have become due and payable to the deceased only after his death."
Thus, in view of the judgments of Hon'ble apex Courts the amount of compensation
does not fall within the parameters of Tarka; thus, no one can claim the same as matter of legitimate right and impugned judgment passed by learned appellate Court is well reasoning does not suffer from any material illegality or irregularity to warrant interference by the Courts.
For the reasons, the petition being devoid of merits is dismissed with no order as to
cost.
ZH/194/Bal. Revision dismissed.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.