When on 12.04.2009, Rafiq Ahmad, predecessor-in-interest of present Respondents No, 2 to 4 breathed his last, his succession was opened. Said deceased was survived through the following- legal heirs:--
(i) Mst. Allah Bachai mother
(ii) Mst. Shahnaz Bibi widow
(iii) Ahmad Hassan son Ahmad Hassan, the minor son, through his real mother Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, applied for getting succession certificate of the legacy of his deceased father before the Civil Judge at Rajanpur.
2. Shafique Ahmad, brother of deceased Rafiq Ahmad, intervened in the proceedings by putting his claim against the property owned by the deceased Rafiq Ahmad in his life time, particularly, with regard to the saving certificates obtained by deceased from National Saving Centres.
3. In order to resolve such controversy, the learned Civil Judge, seized of the matter, proceeded to frame the issues reflecting such controversy and by means of order dated 02.11.2011, over-ruled the objections of Shafique Ahmad and wanted succession certificate under the Succession Act, 1925 in favour of Ahmad Hassan, real son of the deceased Rafiq Ahmad, as also in favour of Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, widow of deceased, and the legal heirs of Mst. Allah Bachai, mother of deceased, who expired during pendency of the proceedings before the Civil Judge.
4. The petitioner Shafique Ahmad feeling himself aggrieved of such findings of the learned Civil Judge, preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge, Rajanpur, which was entrusted to an Additional District Judge at Rajanpur, who vide judgment dated 17.01.2012, proceeded to dismiss the same; hence, this revision petition before this Court.
5. Under Section 373 of the Succession Act, 1925 (XXXIX of 1925), the Court, which entertained the application, is suppose to proceed to decide the same in a summary manner as to the right to said certificate.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Dr. Saleem Jaued and others us. Mst. Fauzia Nasirn and others (2003 SCM R 965) has held that the objector/intervener being not a legal heir of the deceased and that no Court had given any verdict in favour of such objector's claim as a charge on the property of the deceased, the provisions of the Succession Act, 1925, would not be helpful to such person to establish claim either to become a party in the application for grant of succession certificate to the applicants or raise any claim in the estate left by the deceased. Further held that the Court, seized of the matter, relating to the issue of succession certificate could not adjudicate the claim of third person against the deceased for the satisfaction of stated claim from deceased's property. The objector although real brother of deceased, but is considered as a stranger in the proceedings for grant of succession certificate to the legal heirs of the deceased and would have no locus-standi to allow him to join the proceedings, for, such proceedings are limited in nature to the extent of the determination of the rights of legal heirs of the deceased inter-se and scope of such proceedings cannot be enlarged to the settlement of the disputed claim and determination of liabilities of legal heirs of the deceased.
7. In case of Mst. Jameela Akhtar vs. Public-at-Large and others (2002 SCM R 1544), it has been held that such intricate questions of fact could not be decided in summary proceedings and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan advised the person claiming his entitlement in the estate of the deceased to get establish the same by filing a civil suit. The payment from the estate of the deceased in accordance with the respective shares of the legal heirs was not stopped; however, it was left open that in case the objector ultimately succeeds in civil suit in establishing his right to certain extent in the estate of the deceased, then suitable adjustment will be permissible from the amount already received by the legal heirs on the strength of the succession certificate.
8. The Courts-below while determining the shares of the legal heirs have come to the conclusion that Mst. Allah Bachai, mother of Rafiq Ahmad deceased would inherit to the extent of 4/24 shares equal to Rs, 1954036.50/-, whereas, Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, widow of deceased, would be entitled to 3/24 shares equal to Rs, 1465557.375/- and Ahmad Hassan, the son of the deceased, would be entitled to 17/24 shares equal to Rs, 8304655.125/-.
9. Admittedly, Mst. Allah Bachai, mother of deceased Rafiq Ahmad, expired during pendency of the succession proceedings and Respondents No, 4a to 4f as also the petitioner, Ahmad Hassan (son of deceased) and Mst. Shahnaz Bibi (widow of deceased), respectively, being legal heirs of pre- deceased son of Mst. Allah Bachai would be entitled to get their respective shares from 4/24 shares of Mst. Allah Bachai.
10. I have been informed during the course of arguments that the petitioner Shafique Ahmad has also filed a declaratory suit before the Civil Court on 06.03.2012, which is still pending. The share from Mst. Allah Bachai's entitlement would be the exclusive ownership of the persons, who were entitled to get the same, but in case of ultimate success of the petitioner in civil suit, the amount received by Ahmad Hassan, and Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, son and widow of the deceased Rafiq Ahmad, would be liable to be adjusted accordingly as per the final verdict in the civil suit.
11. With these observations, finding no force in the revision petition, the same is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.