1. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.---The dispute raised in this direct appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 18-6-1989, relates to the grant of a succession certificate. The property involved is Account No,PLS 37/3 and amounts connected therewith, lying in a Branch of Muslim Commercial Bank Limited. It was a joint account "payable to either or survivor". It could be operated in accordance with a special instruction amongst others, as follows:-- "Either of us on our behalf."
2. The joint holders were husband and wife. The husband died. His heirs, including the appellant wanted to have the account-share in the amounts and the profits etc. In accordance with Islamic law of inheritance while the respondent No,1, the other joint-holder of the account, the widow of the deceased claimed exclusive right in this behalf on several grounds, including what her learned counsel stated, that the amount is in lieu of her dower. The learned Civil Judge granted the Certificate to the appellant to the extent of his assumed Islamic share. The appeal filed by the respondents side in the High Court succeeded on the ground that the case involved disputed questions of fact and law and it should have been decided as a suit. On direct appeal one of us (Dr. Nasim Hasan Shah, J.) by an interim order dated 30th August, 1989, issued notice and in the meanwhile directed that the operation of the order of the High Court shall remain suspended.
3. Today some arguments were addressed on the merits of the prima facie case of either side during which the following case-law was also referred:--
(i) Ch. Habibullah v. Sheikhupura Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. PLD 1987 SC 53.
(ii) Amtul Habib v. Musarrat Parveen PLD 1974 SC 185.
(iii) Mirza Muhammad Amin etc. v. Government of Pakistan PLD 1982 F.S.C.
4. 143.
(iv) Guran Ditta and another v. T. Ram Ditta AIR 1928 Privy Council 172.
5. However, after some discussion the parties agreed; firstly, that the main appeal be decided; and secondly, that it should be allowed with the following agreed order:-- "The parties agree that the appeal be finally decided declaraing that one-half (1/2) of the amount i,e. Rs,1,50,000 with interest (profits) be received by Mst. Noor Begum widow of Aspeen Gul deceased and rest of the amount of Rs,1,50,000 be divided as follows:--
(i) 1/4th share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Mst. Noor Begum (Respondent No,1)
(ii) 1/4th share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Mohammad Akram (Respondent No,2)
(iii) 1/2 share with proportionate interest (profits) to go to Sanam Jan Khan (Appellant)."
6. Accordingly this appeal is partly allowed in the terms afore-recorded. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. 1990 SCMR 883 [Shariat Appellate Bench] {{URDU TEXT}} Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)- -- S. 10(3)- {{URDU TEXT}} Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- - - S. 377- {{URDU TEXT}} 1990 SCMR 886 [Shariat Appellate Bench] {{URDU TEXT}}
(a) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)- -- Ss. 10(3) & 11- {{URDU TEXT}} {{URDU TEXT}}
(b) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)- -- Ss. 10(3) & 11- {{URDU TEXT}}
(c) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)-- Ss. 10(3) & 11-- {{URDU TEXT}} 1990 SCMR 889 [Shariat Appellate Bench] {{URDU TEXT}}
(b) Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979)- -- Ss. 17 & 20-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 392-- {{URDU TEXT}}
(c) Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979)- --- S. 20-Penal .Code {{URDU TEXT}} {{URDU TEXT}}