Section 2 Special Relief Act (I of 1877), suits for the permanent injunction of Articles 42 and 54 of the Parties, which are located in two districts A (his home district) and B in 1946 (where he lived until his death). ) The first hereditary mutation of the late in District A was certified in favor of all legal heirs in favor of the plaintiff (his son), except for the plaintiff (his widow and daughters), the second heir of the deceased in District B That the deceased's legacy was under customs-administered law and not by law. By law, there is nothing in the record that this custom existed in Local District A, where the inheritance of the deceased was opened according to the Shariah and the claimants were given their share of the estate of the deceased if the customs on the parties at that time Used to be. The death of the late, then the inheritance would have been opened in both the districts, according to which the plaintiff was excluded from the inheritance, not by custom, but by any means of fraud and disclosure as absence. At the same time, two different laws on the property would be against the consistency; thus, the second variable was subjected to such rule, the first legacy variable remained intact and there was no conflict. A copy of the customs related to the District B area prepared by the defendant in 1919 1920 by the defendant or any other body shows that the daughters were also inherited from their ancestral property and the suit was passed on to another. The retaliation was declared illegal and fraudulent.
