' SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.---This civil revision is directed against the appellate order dated 7-9-2009.
2. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the lis at hand are; that respondent No,1, the widow of one Mian Abdul Khaliq filed a suit for enforcement of her right of inheritance. The said suit was resisted and eventually decided in her favour by this Court in a revision petition which was challenged unsuccessfully before the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan. Where after, the present petitioner filed an application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Claiming also to be the widow of Abdul Khaliq. The said application was filed before this Court. The petitioner took up the plea that she was not being impleaded in the suit or in the proceedings before this Court. The said application under section 12(2), C.P.C. Was disposed of with a direction that the petitioner should seek her remedy through a separate civil suit. Consequently, the petitioner filed a suit against the respondents claiming to be the widow of Abdul Khaliq and entitled to her share of inheritance. The suit was resisted primarily by respondent No,1. Along with the plaint an application for grant of temporary injunction was filed to protect her share in the property against the execution of the decree in favour of respondent No,1. The said application was accepted by the trial court vide order dated 3-6-2009. Aggrieved, respondent No,1 filed an appeal which was disposed of by the first appellate court vide order impugned dated 7-9-2009 holding that respondent No,1 was entitled to execution of the decree to the extent of 1/16 share in the estate thereby protecting the right of the petitioner to the extent of the balance 1/16 share.
3. Counsel for the parties have been heard and record perused. This Court has been informed that the estate of Abdul Khaliq consists of bank accounts and with the immovable property. With reference to bank accounts obviously respondent No,1 is entitled to receive 1/16 share in terms of the impugned order. However, with reference to immovable property the share of respondent No, 1 is an undivided share and, therefore, her entitlement to possession of specific immovable property is obviously subject to partition thereof. Consequently, this petition is disposed of with the above observation.