' SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal have been filed against the order of Sindh High Court, dated 6-12-2006 in First Appeals Nos.15 to 17 of 2006 whereby these appeals were disposed of in the following terms:- "These appeals are hereby allowed and the order of the learned District Court/Executing Court is hereby modified to the extent that the appellants being heirs of the said deceased are liable to pay towards the debts of the deceased only to the extent of 44.37% and not more than that. Further, the proclamation of sale issued by the Executing Court should be corrected so as to direct the amount against the debts left by the deceased, to be recovered from the appellants shall be only to the extent of 44.37% of the debt of the deceased, and not beyond that."
2. From perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, the facts and circumstances of the case become very clear. The grievance of the petitioners is that the District Judge has passed judgment/decree for whole of the amount in the suit and subsequently, he could not restrict the same to the extent of 44.37% which was a grave and serious illegality and the High Court by not rectifying and upholding the same perpetuated the illegality. This contention is without any force. High Court has never declared the decree to be violative or defective and held that as the petitioners had agreed to delete the names of four minors from the array of defendants of the suit filed by them, therefore, they by doing so had surrendered their right to recover debt outstanding against the deceased to the extent of the shares of the aforesaid four minors in estate/moneys left by the deceased and would be entitled only to proceed against the remaining heirs of deceased, the shares of whom comes to 44.37%. This was the only correction which was made by the learned District Judge and upheld by the High Court and the same cannot in any manner said to be illegal or against any provision of law.
3. Order of the High Court does not suffer from any illegality, or irregularity which requires interference. This petition is without any substance and is dismissed. .