SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.- This is a petition filed by Mst. Nazran Bibi, etc. For leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 5.7.1999 passed by an Hon'ble Single Judge of Lahore High Court in Civil Revision No. 1450 of 1998.
2. One Heera was said to be owner of 363 Kanals, 18 Marlas of land. He died on 10.11.1950 leaving behind his two daughters, namely, Mst. Nazran Bibi, Mst. Jeenan Bibi and three children of his predeceased son Khushi Muhammad, children being Mst. Sharifan and Mst. Hanifan, the daughters and Annas, the son. Annas also is stated to have died on 28.1.1958. The property devolved upon Mst.
Nazran and Mst. Jeenan and hence Mst. Sharifan and Mst. Hanifan the daughters of pre-deceased son Khushi Muhammad filed a suit claiming declaration of title to the extent of 1/3rd share in the property of Heera.
3. The Trial Court after evaluating evidence of the parties decreed the suit on 19.12.1995, appeal against which before the learned Additional District Judge, Kasur on 22.6.1998 and so was the fate of revision.
4. After having gone through the record, we are of the view that the question of fact has rightly been determined concurrently by three Courts below and thus, this Court should not interfere, specially, when there are no signs of miscarriage of justice.
5. The property having received through inheritance, Mst. Jeenan happened to transfer 41 kanals of land through mutation Exh. D-29 to her sister Mst. Nazran on 22.7.1970. The transferor lady being the owner of 121 kanals, was entitled to the aforesaid transfer and hence the same was rightly declared to be valid.
6. Mst. Jeenan entered into a second alienation in favour of one Mst. Safi a Begum vide registered gift deed, dated 1.6.1976 (Exh. D-32). This alienation was with regard to 121 Kanals, 4 Marlas but as calculated earlier, her remaining share was left over as 80 Kanals, 3 Marlas and hence this second alienation was considered valid to such an extent and void to extent in excess thereof.
7. Another point was raised before us that in fact Heera at the time of his death had owned no property at all. That it was his claim which matured subsequently and thus, the property was allotted to the surviving daughters Mst. Nazran and Mst. Jeenan, That this transfer being one in the right of the transferees, the inheritance could not be opened from Heera. We believe, after close examination of the case, that if it was a claim of Heera according to which the allotment was to be done, then on his death before allotment, the same should have gone to the entire family including Mst. Sharifan, Mst. Hanifan and Annas. The same was accordingly granted by the Courts below in accordance with complete equity. We refrain lo interfere in the concurrent finding of three Courts below.
8. The petition is rejected and leave to appeal is refused.