1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.---This appeal through leave of the Court is directed against the dismissal by the High Court, of the appellant's Civil Revision. It had arisen out of a case regarding succession certificate.
2. ' The facts and point for grant of leave to appeal were noted as follows:-- "Leave to appeal has been sought against the judgment dated 1-4-1990 of the Peshawar High Court."
3. The facts, in brief, are that the respondent No,1, an 'Indian National, obtained succession certificate from the' Senior Civil Judge vide judgment dated 11-10-1986 in respect of the securities left by his father Girdhari Lal, an Indian Pakistan national. This order was challenged by the petitioner before the lower Courts and then before the High Court.
4. ' The 'High Court by the impugned judgment maintained the order of the Senior Civil Judge.
5. ' On receipt of the application, a proclamation was issued to the public which was published in the "Pakistan Times" but none appeared to contest the application.
6. ' The learned Advocate-General submitted that the deceased Girdhari Lal had left other legal heirs in India but no notice was served on them and there is no evidence that the other heirs had knowledge of the application for grant of the Succession Certificate submitted by the respondent No,1. In the absence of all the legal heirs the succession certificate could not be issued. He further submitted that the respondent No,1 being an Indian National could not repatriate the amount and the ornaments from the country of its origin."
7. ' The learned Advocate-General has stated that all necessary steps have been taken to serve all concerned in this case. None has appeared to oppose this appeal. After hearing the learned Advocate-General the following position and points are not in dispute:--
(a) that the deceased Pakistani non-Muslim did leave movable assets including cash and gold;
(b) that there could not be any legal impediment in the heirs of the deceased seeking and obtaining a Succession Certificate in accordance with the prevailing law in Pakistan;
(c) Even if it be assumed, that other heirs of the deceased were not involved by respondent No,1 in the proceedings for grant of Succession Certificate in accordance with the prescribed procedure, the fact remains that none has appeared from amongst other heirs of the deceased to object to the grant of Succession Certificate;
(d) that assuming for the sake of argument that the Succession Certificate has rightly been granted, still the question would remain whether the respondent can take out of Pakistan the cash and gold to India without observing the legal formalities in this behalf including permission from the State Bank of Pakistan and other Authorities. Obviously there was no licence or assumption for the respondent to bypass the concerned formalities which as stated by the learned Advocate- General are fairly elaborate;
(e) that the respondent has already succeeded in surreptitiously taking away a large amount of cash out of Pakistan without fulfilling the necessary formalities. This statement of fact is based upon the present information of the learned Advocate-General, which he frankly and fairly conceded should remain subject to all just exceptions, so as to avoid any unnecessary harm to the respondent on the basis of the assumption being made by this Court in this behalf;
(f) that the gold still lying with the Commissioner of D.I. Khan cannot be removed from Pakistan without observing the legal formalities in that behalf.
8. In the light of what has been stated above while conceding the locus standi of the petitioner to file a revision in the High Court and also to file the present appeal in this Court (as ultimate Custodian of the property of all the citizens of Pakistan in addition to other rights and liabilities of the Government under the Constitution and the law) it is directed that if and when the respondent or any other person seeks to obtain delivery of the gold or any other property of the deceased from the Commissioner, D.I. Khan, or any Government Authority, the said Commissioner and/or Authority shall inform the Provincial Government and seek prior permission thereof in this behalf. It is further clarified that, in case, any difficulty arises in this behalf a reference may be made to this Court for removal thereof.
9. ' With the above finding, correction, clarifications and directions this appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs.