Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

YASIN versus HUSSAIN BIBI


Application for leave to appeal Article 4 (((ion)))
1983 S C M R 1250

Present : Aslam Riaz Hussain and Mian Burhanuddin Khan, JJ

YASIN AND OTHERS‑Petitioners

Versus

Mst. HUSSAIN BIBI (REPRESENTED BY LEGAL HEIRS)

AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 565 and 566 of 1981, decided on 10th April, 1983.

(Against the judgments and decrees of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 28th February, 1981 passed in R. S. A. Nos. 369/66 and 376/66).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑

----Art. 185 (3)‑Petition for leave to appeal‑Succession‑Petitioner not raising plea before High Court nor took up same position when respondent led evidence before trial Court‑.Supreme Court did not permit petitioner to urge said plea at leave to appeal stage‑ Petition dismissed.

Mian Nisar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Abid Hassan Minto, Advocate Supreme Court with Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents,

Date of hearing : 10th April, 1983.

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑

This order shall dispose of two Petitions (Nos. 565 and 566 of 1981) directed against the judgments of the High Courts, dated 28‑2‑1981, dismissing R. S. As. filed by the petitioners in inheritance matter.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length. The case relates to the succession under the Shariat Law to the life interest of Mst. Hussain Bibi widow of Fateh Din, by his collaterals, in the land left by Fateh Din. According to the petitioners counsel the matter hinges on whether or not Hassan the son of the said Fateh Din had pre‑deceased him. He submitted although evidence was led on this question by the plaintiff‑respondent but the latter should not have been permitted by the trial Court to lead evidence on the point as it did not arise out of the pleadings of the parties. He, however, admitted that he did not raise this plea before the High Court nor did the petitioners take up this position when the respondents led their evidence before the trial Court In view of these circumstances we cannot permit the petitioner to urge the said ground at this stage.

Both the petitions are consequently dismissed.

M. Z. M.

Petitions dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
advocate for immigration from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.