SYED HASSAN AZHAR RIZVI, J.---The appellant is aggrieved with the order dated 05.10.2016 already passed by the District Judge Karachi (East) in SMA No.1001/2016, The appellant is admittedly widow of Syed Yousufuddin Khan son of Muhammad Shamsuddin Khan holding Passport No.Z-2089774, who expired on 30.3.2016 in Dubai UAE. The deceased left the following five surviving legal heirs:--
1. Waseem SultanaWidow 42101-8127639-8
2. San Khan Daughter 42101-3262102-8
3. Syeda Khadija KhanDaughter 42101-2399570-9
4. Muhammad LatifuddinSon 42101-2399570-9
5. Muhammad Mohiuddin KhanSon 42101-4370221-7 All the legal heirs are adults and they have got their Pakistani Computerized National Identity Cards (CNICs) from NADRA. The details of the CNICs issued by the NADRA' to all the legal heirs are mentioned above. Appellant has also obtained Family Registration Certificate (FRC) issued on 15.7.2016, copy of the same is enclosed as Annexure 'C' at Page No.23 of the MoA. The marriage of the appellant with the above-named deceased was solemnized in Karachi on 27.2.1983, photocopy of Nikahnama was attested and verified/certified by the Consulate General of UAE at Karachi on 13.11.1989, copy of Nikahnama is enclosed as Annexure 'B' at Page No.19 with the MoA. All the children from the wedlock of the appellant and above-named deceased were born in Karachi and are getting education or got education from Karachi. The deceased was serving as 'Business Development Manager' with Express Printing Services (LLC), Dubai, UAE by virtue of such employment the deceased became entitled to Group Life Insurance Policy No.GIP-15245 issued by Alliance Insurance (Public Shareholding Company) UAE. The Insurance Company named above on 18.5.2016 issued a payment of AED 144,000/ - (UAE Dirhams One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand only) as death claim amount against Claim No.DC-03/16, in favour of the successors of the deceased. The death claim amount has been released to the Employer Company, who is now responsible for forwarding the same to the successors of the deceased. The Employer Company has issued letters to the appellant the legally wedded wife of the deceased on 22.6.2016 and 25.09.2016 to produce a succession certificate issued by a Pakistani Court in order to receive the Death Claim Amount. Learned counsel contends that pursuant to the request of the Employer Company appellant filed SMA No.1001/2016. He contends that though the appellant has fulfilled all the requisite formalities i.e. publication of notice, affidavit of No Objection from all the legal heirs and affidavits' of two independent witnesses, the learned District Judge on technical grounds/ reasons dismissed the Succession Misc. Application of the appellant, resultantly the instant appeal is filed. In support of his case he placed reliance upon the cases of Miss. Amtul Naseer Sami v.
Secretary, Health, Government of Bauchistan and others (1975 SCMR 265), Muhammad Ramzan v.
Nasreen Firdous and others (PLD 2016 SC 174), Yusuf Abbas and others v. Mst. Ismat Mustafa and others (PLD 1968 Karachi 480). Learned counsel has also placed reliance to a decision passed by a bench of this Court in S.M.A. No.230 of 2016 (in the matter of Ms. Saira Ahmed Khan). For ready reference relevant portions of the said decision are reproduced below:-- "In addition to the above, the other distinguishing factor was a serious objection of jurisdiction raised in the above Muhammad Ramzan case, by the defendants, who were residing in the UK, whereas in the present petition, it is an admitted position that all the parties, the petitioner and other legal heirs, have themselves submitted to the jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer that an order for the. administration of the estate left by the Deceased be passed. The second distinguishing factor in the present case is that, admittedly it is a non-contentious matter and it has been specifically mentioned in the pleadings that though the Deceased was domiciled in Pakistan, having a Pakistani Passport and Computerized National Identity. Card (CNIC); Annexure 'B' in the Court file, but have properties outside Pakistan. In this context, if paragraph-21 of Yusuf Abbas and others' (ibid), is read carefully for guidance, it was held, that Courts in Pakistan can exercise jurisdiction in respect of the properties outside Pakistan by invoking the rule of jurisdiction in personam and in such cases, Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, inter alia, about cause of action vis-a-vis an immoveable property situate within Pakistan, would not be applicable.
In addition to the above, in my considered view, sections 13 and 44-A of our Civil Procedure Code, 1908, make a provision for recognition of foreign judgments by Pakistani Courts, as Pakistan also has a reciprocal arrangement with other Countries.....' ...Similarly, there is also a provision in the Civil Procedure Statute of United Arab Emirates with regard to enforceability of decisions given by other countries. The relevant provisions are mentioned in the Chapter IV of Volume Three, in Federal Law No.11 of 1992 of the Civil Procedure Law of United Arab Emirates. These provisions, inter alia, pertain to the Execution of Foreign Judgments, Orders and Deeds. Under Article (235) of this Chapter, recognition has been accorded to the Judgments and Orders given in Foreign Countries. Besides this, under an arrangement of reciprocity, the Federal Government (of Pakistan) through its Law, Justice and Human Rights Division has issued a Notification dated 06.03.2007 being S.R.O.208(I)/ 2007, inter alia, in exercise of powers mentioned under section 44A of our Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, whereby United Arab Emirates has been declared a reciprocating territory and its Court of Appeal has been recognized as a Superior Court for the purpose of the said section....' .....The world should not become a global village merely for achieving financial objectives but also for the convenience of an ordinary citizen (person). It would be an inconvenience, rather a hardship for the present Petitioner and her siblings to file the proceedings in respect of properties of her deceased father in three different Countries; Pakistan for moveable property, United Kingdom and United Arab Emirates for the immoveable properties, particularly, when instant Proceeding is a non-contentious in nature. Proprietary rights are mentioned in Article 17 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and hence they can neither be ignored nor their significance can be lessened.
Thus, in view of the above discussion, proceedings of the nature can be initiated in one of the jurisdictions, where the properties are situated and is enforceable in other foreign jurisdictions in view of the above mentioned Statutory provisions and Executive Instruments."
In view of the above as there is no objection has received from any quarter in the Succession Misc.
Application No.1001/2016 filed by the Appellant before the learned District Judge, Karachi-East despite publication of notice so also the record maintained by the NADRA the appellant and the legal heirs whose names are mentioned in the Memo, of appeal and FRC (Family Registration Certificate) issued by the NADRA there is no other person to claim the heirship of the deceased Syed Yousufuddin Khan, The matter remains non-contentious. Therefore, in my humble opinion that there is no impediment in granting Succession Certificate in favour of the appellant, I, therefore, allow the, Instant appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 05.10.2016, which has not been passed keeping in view the true prospects of the case. Nazir of District and Sessions Court Karachi (East) is directed to issue Succession Certificate in favour of the appellant as per rules.