' RANA BHAGWANDAS, J.---The petitioners, being legal heirs of Fazal (since deceased), seek leave to appeal against the Lahore High Court judgment, dated 4-5-1999 allowing respondents' Civil Revision No, 1402/D of 1998 against concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial Court as well as Appellate Court decreeing the suit of the petitioners.
2. Petitioners filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of agricultural land measuring 57 Kanals 18 Marlas situated in Mauza Dohal, Tehsil and District Sialkot, on the averment that Mst. Rehmat Bibi, being the widow of deceased Fazal, acquired limited right in the property but after the promulgation of Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962 with effect from 31- 12-1962, she acquired sole ownership in the property by reason of adverse possession as against the rights of other co-owners in the property. The suit was resisted. Both the parties adduced evidence. In the ultimate analysis suit was decreed. Appeal preferred against the judgment and decree of the trial Court failed but in civil revision, learned Judge in Chambers of the Lahore High Court reversed the findings of fact recorded by the two Courts below and on acceptance of the revision petition, suit of the petitioners was dismissed.. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
3. From the record it transpires that propositus of the parties Fazal expired some time in 1938. He left behind his widow Mst. Rehmat Bibi and two daughters namely Mst. Hussain Bibi and Mst. Jeewan Bibi, who inherited the property in dispute. Mst. Rehmat Bibi acquired limited interest in the property under custom but after the promulgation of Act V of 1962, her limited right stood terminated.
Thereafter she was governed by the Muslim Law of Inheritance under which she was entitled to 1/8th share in the property whereas both the daughters would be entitled to 2/3rd share in the estate. Remaining share in the property would revert to the collaterals of deceased Fazal. After the demise of Mst. Rehmat Bibi on 2-10-1976 Record of Rights was mutated vide mutation No,4, dated 26-10-1977 in favour of respondents to the extent of 1/3rd and in favour of Mst. Hussain Bibi and Mst.
Jewan Bibi to the extent of 2/3rd share.
4. In their suit the petitioners claimed a declaration of title to the extent of whole share on the premise that after the promulgation of Act V of 1962 Mst. Rehmat Bibi remained in exclusive, uninterrupted, and hostile occupation of the whole land to the exclusion of other co-owners including the respondents. The suit was resisted and though decreed at the trial and affirmed in appeal but in civil revision before the High Court, learned Judge in Chambers disturbed the findings of fact and dismissed the suit.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record as well as impugned judgment. Mr. Ramay, learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioners, reiterated the same arguments as advanced before the High Court. Sole ground urged by learned counsel for the respondents before us however is that since Mst. Rehmat Bibi did not claim her share in the property under the Muslim Personal Law at this belated stage the petitioners cannot claim any right as legal heirs of said Mst. Rehmat Bibi. The argument is wholly misconceived and untenable as inheritance under the Muslim Personal Law takes place automatically and each legal heir is entitled to get his respective share irrespective of any claim or demand therefor. The law is well- settled in Ghulam Ali v. Mst. Ghulam Sarwar Naqvi PLD 1990 SC 1 by this Court which principle holds the field and essentially protects the right of women to inherit ancestral property and more particularly of Pardah Nashin illiterate women who are generally unaware of their rights under the law, and deprived of their share in our male dominated society.
6. We are least impressed by the submission of the learned counsel and are of the view that this Court, being the apex Court, is not onlypossessed of the jurisdiction but also under a duty to dispense justice without being hindered by any technicality which should not be allowedto thwart the course of justice under the law. Under the Muslim Law of Inheritance after the death of Fazal, Mst. Rehmat Bibi was entitled to1/8th share in the property whereas Mst. Hussain Bibi and_Mst.
Jeewan Bibi were entitled to 2/3rd share while the remaining share would revert to the collaterals of the deceased. Likewise after the death of Mst. Rehmat Bibi her share in the property would be inherited by her legal heirs in the same way.
7. Consistent with the interests of justice, fair play, equity and Islamic principles, we convert this petition into appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court and decree the suit in above terms with the observation that the Revenue Authorities shall mutate the record in line with this judgment and ensure compliance of the same forthwith. There will, however, be no order as to costs.