' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.-The dispute in this case relates to inheritance in the estate of Imam Din who died in 1949. Inheritance Mutation No,155 was sanctioned on 28-5-1951 in favor of the 8 sons and 2 daughters of Imam Din. On 11-7-1993 i,e, more than 42 years after the aforesaid mutation two sons of Imam Din, namely, Fazal Ahmad (respondent No,1) and Umar Hayat (respondent No,2).Filed a declaratory suit out of which this petition has arisen. It was their case that Imam Din also had a daughter named Begum Bibi who was deprived of inheritance. Here it is to be noted that the two plaintiffs had received their share in the inheritance along with their six brothers and two sisters, namely, Rehmat Bibi and Fatima Bibi as per inheritance Mutation No,155 referred to above.
2. Begum Bibi or her legal heirs, who were arrayed as defendants Nos. 24 to 31, neither filed a suit nor have they expressed any grievance against inheritance Mutation No,155. Even more importantly, none ofthem has entered the witness box to assert that Begum Bibi was a daughter of Imam Din.
3. In the foregoing circumstances, there was no occasion for decreeing the suit. Apart from the plaintiffs only unconnected persons were produced as witnesses who did not possess the qualification required by Article 64 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order to prove that Begum Bibi was a daughter of Imam Din. The plaintiffs themselves were also stopped by their conduct from calling in question Mutation No,155 which was sanctioned 42 years before the filing of the suit and based on which they had been enjoying the benefits' of the suit property. Additionally, even the death certificate produced on record originally did not prove that it related to a daughter of Imam Din.
Exh.P-6, Exh.P-7 and Exh.P-8, which have been relied upon by the Courts below, also do not prove that Begum Bibi was the daughter of Imam Din. This is particularly so in view of the failure of defendants. Nos. 24-31 to appear in the witness box to assert their claim on oath and to submit to cross-examination.
4. In the foregoing circumstances, I find the impugned decrees to be against the law. The same are, therefore, set aside. As a consequence, the suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs is dismissed.