SALEEM ISLAM vs Syed ZAFAR-UL-ISLAM Ss — 2022 PLD 278 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

SALEEM ISLAM VS Syed ZAFAR-UL-ISLAM Ss. 278, 300 & 372---Petition for grant of letter of administration and succession certificate----Office objection---Matter not falling in the prescribed pecuniary jurisdiction of the (Sindh) High Court---No exceptional circumstances for (Sindh) High Court to exercise concurrent jurisdiction---In the present case, after the petitioner removed an immoveable property from the list of properties mentioned in his petition, the Deputy Registrar of (Sindh) High Court submitted objections that on the exclusion of the said immovable property the (Sindh) High Court had no pecuniary jurisdiction left in the matter---Counsel for petitioner submitted that the jurisdiction of the (Sindh) High Court as well as that of the district judge in exercise of the powers under Succession Act, 1925 was concurrent in terms of section 300; that since the present matter was pending for quite some time, (Sindh) High Court could exercise its concurrent jurisdiction and proceed with the case---Held, that subject immovable property never stood in name of deceased parents of petitioner at any point of time---On the strength of an agreement of sale an attempt was made by the petitioner to include said property in the list of the immovable properties---Record reflected that a day after the present petition was filed objections regarding the original title documents were taken by the Deputy Registrar (O.S.)---Thus the petitioner was promptly informed and was very much aware that present petition was filed in the absence of title documents of an immovable property on the basis of which the pecuniary jurisdiction could be invoked by the (Sindh) High Court---However, it was also at the request of the counsel of petitioner that amended petition after excluding the subject immovable property was filed which took away the pecuniary jurisdiction of (Sindh) High Court---Concurrent jurisdiction could only be exercised in exceptional cases and any such circumstances did not exist in the present case---Office objections were sustained, as the matter did not fall under the prescribed pecuniary jurisdiction of the (Sindh) High Court and the circumstances were not such which could compel the (Sindh) High Court to exercise concurrent jurisdiction in terms of S.300 of Succession Act, 1925----Application was disposed of accordingly.

SALEEM ISLAM vs Syed ZAFAR-UL-ISLAM Ss — 2022 PLD 278 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD