' The brief facts leading to this revision are that on the death of Muhammad Ismail who was an allottee under the Cooperative Farming Scheme, his allotment was transferred in the name of the respondent Sher Muhammad as his nominee in terms of the bye-laws of Cooperative Farming Scheme, vide Mutation Rs, 175, dated 14-4-1982. The appeal and then the revision filed by the petitioners claiming share in the inheritance of Muhammad Ismail as his sons under the Shariat Act were rejected on point of limitation. The petitioners are now in second revision against the orders of the learned Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Multan, dated 18-10-1984.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It has been held by the Lahore High Court and also the Board of Revenue that the bye-laws of the Co-operative Farming Societies stand superseded by the provisions of the Shariat Act. The only point for decision is as to whether the petitioners could have been denied their share in the inheritance of their father only on point of limitation. On this issue, I would hold that the right of a legal heir does not abate merely by passage of time. Since the petitioners are legally entitled to share in the inheritance of their father. I would accept the second revision and order that they should be given equal share along with respondent, Sher Muhammad in the inheritance of Muhammad Ismail. 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.