' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, ACTG. C.J.--- petition calls in question judgment, dated 13-1- 2004 passed by Lahore High Court. Concluding para. Therefrom is reproduced hereinbelow:-- "The submission made by the learned counsel for the applicants has been considered. It has no merit. As a result of examination of the evidence produced in this case this Court found that one Shamir had four sons namely Eida, Shams Din, Karam Dad and Imam Bakhsh. The vendors, were the sons of Manda son of Eida while Ghulam Haider, rival pre-emptor, was son of Murad son of Shams Din. Mst. Ayesha Bibi was a daughter of Fateh Din son of Imam Din. Thus, while the vendors, were the grandsons of the brother of Shams-ud-Din, the grandfather of Ghulam Haider. Mst.
Ayesha Bibi was a granddaughter of Imam Bakhsh, real brother of Eida, the grandfather of the vendors,. A female descendant of a common ancestor is not a residuary and does not find any mention in the table of residuaries given in the Muhammadan Law by Mulla. The illustration being relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants is not applicable. It provides that son's daughter inherits as residuary with daughters, son's son."
2. When the learned counsel was called upon to satisfy as to whether a female descendant of a common ancestor is not a residuary and does not find any mention in the table of residuaries given in the Muhammadan Law of Mulla, he could not answer satisfactorily despite the fact that he read certain provisions from the Muhammadan Law. In such view of the matter we are of the opinion that female is not a descendant of a common ancestor.
Thus, for the foregoing reasons the petition is dismissed and leave declined.