Find a Lawyer

Miscellaneous Application No. 1 of 1982, decided on 3rd February, 1985.

---S. 218--Letters of Administration--Widow applying for grant of letters of Administration in respect of property belonging to her deceased husband--Father of deceased objecting to grant of letters of Administration on ground that one of items included in schedule of immovable property, attached with petition belonged to him as it had been gifted to him by his deceased son during his lifetime--Fact of gift denied by widow of deceased--Another objection of father being that he was being deprived of his 1/6 share of property of deceased--On Court's advice both parties compromising and agreeing that matter of dispute of gift may be left to be resolved through civil Court and Letters of Administration be issued to widow regarding other properties subject to such terms which would ensure payment of share of return obtained by widow to father of deceased according to his share--Such agreement found to be just and fair and safeguarding interests of minors--Letters of administration issued in favour of widow of deceased accordingly.

Yousuf Hussain for Petitioner.

Rashiduddin Ahmed for Objector.

Respondent in Person.

Date of hearing: 3rd February, 1985.

This is an application by Mst. Shaher Bano for grant of Letters of Administration in respect of immovable and movable property belonging to her deceased, husband, Abdul Rashid. Schedule of immovable property which is to be considered is by consent that which is disclosed in Nazir's report (page 4) dated 3-10-1985 and for movable property is at Items 7 to 12 of Amended Annexure 'A' filed by petitioner on 22-5-1982.

Publication was made in a daily newspaper and notice wag pasted on Court Notice Board. Asghar Baig, who is the father of the deceased, has appeared through Mr. Rashiduddin Ahmed and objected to the grant of Letters of Administration.

One of the objections of Asghar Baig was that the property shown at Item No. 9 of the schedule of immovable property belongs to him because the deceased, during his lifetime, gifted that property in his favour. Such fact of the property being gifted is contested by the petitioner. The Objector, Asghar Baig, has also contested on the grounds that the value of the property shown in the schedule to the application was incorrect.

When this case came before me on 24-4-1984, 1 had passed an order directing the Nazir of this Court to get the property of the deceased valuated. It was also ordered that the house, which Asghar Baig claims, may also be got valued. The Nazir has submitted his report dated 3-10-1984 wherein hg has given the valuation of nine immovable properties of the deceased Abdul Rashid. Even the three storeyed house, stated to have been obtained by Asghar Baig as a gift from the deceased, (which is contested by the petitioner) has been shown in the list of valuation submitted by the Nazir.

Mr. Rashiduddin Ahmed for Asghar Baig has submitted before me that Asghar Baig was entitled to 1/6 share of the property of his deceased son but he was being deprived of his, share by the petitioner In these circumstances, I asked the learned counsel of both sides who are present with their respective clients if, a way could be found .so that the parties are saved from unnecessary protracted litigation by suits in Civil Court. Both the counsel have stated, that in regard to property shown at Item No. 9 which is in dispute by the reason of the claim of Asghar Baig, that he has obtained it as a gift from his son, the parties may be left to seek their remedy before a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.

In regard to the remaining 8 properties own at Nos. 1 to 8 of the page 4 of the Nazir's report even Mr. Rashiduddin states that Letters of Administration may be granted in favour of the petitioner but subject to such terms which should ensure the payment of the share of return obtained by the petitioner, to Asghar Baig. In my view, this proposal is just and fair and will also safeguard the interests of minors.

I pass the following order:

(1) The Letters of Administration shall be issued' in favour of the petitioner in respect of the 8 properties shown at Item Nos. 1 to 8, at page 4 of the report of the Nazir of this Court dated 3-10-1984.

(2) As per the statement of applicant Mst. Shaher Bano, she is realizing a rent of Rs.9,200 per month from the property shown at Items No. 1 to 8. Asghar Baig would be entitled to receive 1/6 share, which comes to Rs.1,500 from the petitioner.. Such amount shall be paid by Mst. Shaher Bano to Asghar Baig every month.

(3) The movable property which consists of cash amounts shown at Items Nos. 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Annexure 'A' to the petition shall be collected by the petitioner and after such collection she shall pay a sum of Hs.5,600 which would roughly correspond to 1/6 share of Asghar Baig to him.

(4) On maturity of the Defence Saving Certificates shown at Item No. 14 of Annexure 'A' the 1/6 share of the total realization shall be paid by the petitioner to Asghar Baig.

(5) The Suzuki shown at Item No. 13 in Annexure 'A' shall be retained by the petitioner.

(6) The petitioner shall not furnish any security, but she cannot in any manner, sell, mortgage, or alienate the immovable property without the permission of this Court and she shall also submit annual accounts of all the incomes and outgoings of the property. Asghar Baig also shall not in any manner, sell, alienate, or mortgage property shown at Item No. 9 of Nazir's report without orders of this Court.

(7) At page 2 of the Nazir's report it is stated that the house at Item No. 9 at page 4 of the report of Nazir gives rent of Rs.2,500. This is denied by Asghar Baig so that the Nazir was called and he was asked on what basis he has stated so at page 2 of the report, tie stated before me that this has been written at the instance of the petitioner, who gave such information to him. In any case Item No. 9 in the list of property is excluded from the Letters of Administration granted in favour of the petitioner. I do not feel called upon to determine this dispute.

The Nazir's fee which is fixed shall be appreciated by him subject to Administrative Approval.

H. A. K.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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