'MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.--- The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment dated 27-6-2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, in regular Second Appeal arising out of a civil suit.
2. The relevant facts in the background are that late Muhammad Din, father of Mst. Khurshid Bibi (mother of petitioners) and brother of Muhammad Ibrahim, respondent herein, was allotted land measuring 100 Kanals in the area of Fort Abbas, under Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab)
Act, 1912. Mst. Khurshid Bibi and Muhammad Ibrahim, being the sole legal heirs of Muhammad Din on his death, succeeded him in equal shares in the suit-land and accordingly, the mutation of inheritance dated 1-4-1978 to the extent of 1/2 share of each of them was sanctioned.
Subsequently, Mst. Khurshid Bibi died and the petitioners being her successor-in-interest filed a suit for declaration that Mst. Khurshid Bibi was full owner of the land and Muhammad Ibrahim was not entitled to inherit the suit property. The suit was contested by Muhammad Ibrahim, respondent, on various grounds and the learned trial Judge in the light of pleadings of the parties, framed issues and ultimately dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 29-7-1979. The appeal preferred by the petitioners in the Lahore High Court at Bahawalpur Bench, was dismissed vide impugned judgment.
3. The main contention, amongst others, of the petitioners before the High Court in Regular Second Appeal was that sections 30 and 30-A of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 were not considered and given effect. The High Court observed in the matter, as under:- "The effect of section 30-A of the Act, 1912 shall be that any estate held by a female under section 30-A will be in reality limited estate so as to attract provisions of section 3 of Act (V of 1962). On termination of such estate Mst. Khurshid Bibi shall be entitled to hold only her share under Muslim Law of Inheritance. Reliance placed on Mst. Began v. Mst. Bai 1983 SCM R 80."
4. The land measuring 10 Kanals allotted to Muhammad Din, under Colonization of Government Land (Punjab) Act, 1912 was mutated on 21-5-1962 in the name of his unmarried daughter, Mst.
Khurshid Bibi as limited owner till she would be married and since Muhammad Din had no other legal heir, except Muhammad Ibrahim, real brother and Mst. Khurshid Bibi daughter, therefore, on the opening of his succession Mst. Khurshid Bibi and Muhammad Ibrahim would inherit the land in question, in terms of section 19-A of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 and both would get 1/2 share in the land under West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962. This Court in Mst. Began v. Mst. Bai 1983 SCM R 80, held as under:--- "that the estate held under section 30-A(1) by a female is in reality a limited estate held under custom. That being so, the provisions of section 3 of West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Application Act, 1962 would be attracted. The limited estate held by Mst. Bai, as found above, was governed by the said law. It having been terminated, she was entitled to hold only her share under Muslim Law of Inheritance. Sadoo having died issueless, she was given 1/4th share. Therefore, as she could not be given more than that, her suit merited dismissal Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned judgment and decree, the suit of Mst. Bai is dismissed."
5. Under section 21(b) of the (ibid) Act, a tenant of the land would be deemed to have acquired proprietary rights and in case of a Muslim tenant, his succession would be governed by Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Application) Act, 1962. The combined effect of the above provision of law, would be that on termination of limited interest, the succession would open and the legal heirs of a Muslim tenant would inherit property under West Pakistan Muslim Person Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in the name of Mst. Khurshid Bibi in the year 1962 whereas the Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 was made applicable in the District Bahawalpur w,e,f, 4th March, 1951, vide Notification/memo. No,7099-60/8456-C-VIII, dated 27-12-1960 issued by Board of Revenue, Government of West Pakistan and this being so, the allotment in question would be out of the purview of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912, therefore, it would not be subject to West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962 and consequently, Mst. Khurshid Bibi would become exclusive owner of the property on death of Muhammad Din. We are afraid, there is nothing on record to suggest that either Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 was not applicable to the land, subject-matter of dispute or the allotment of lands which were made before application of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 to District Bahawalpur, would not be governed by the said Act after it was extended to the said District. The record would show that the tenancy of the suit-land on promulgation of B Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912 was to be governed by the said Act and Muhammad Din being tenant of the land, would be entitled to proprietary rights by operation of law and would become allottee under Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912. Consequently, the property would devolve upon his legal heirs under West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Application Act, 1962. Learned counsel when confronted with the above legal position, he frankly conceded that from the present record it would not be ascertainable that under which Scheme, the land was allotted to Muhammad Din or that the scheme under which the allotment was made, was not subsequently, made part of Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act, 1912. Learned counsel for the petitioners has not raised any other point in support of this petition and we having perused the record with his help, have not been able to find out any defect or legal infirmity in the impugned judgment through which the High Court C confirmed the concurrent judgments and decrees of the two Courts holding that Mst. Khurshid Bibi and Muhammad Ibrahim were entitled to inherit the property of Muhammad Din in equal share as his legal heirs. The finding of all the three Courts, that Mst. Khurshid Bibi being limited owner, would get 1/2 share in the property and remaining 1/2 would go to Muhammad Ibrahim, being not suffering from any misreading or non- reading of evidence, would not call for interference of this Court.
7. For the foregoing reasons, this petition has no substance and the same is accordingly dismissed.
Leave is refused.