Mst. NUSRAT FAREED vs Haji AHMED MUJAHID S — 2024 PLD 89 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.

Mst. NUSRAT FAREED VS Haji AHMED MUJAHID S.372---Succession application---Estate of deceased (Tarka)---What constitutes estate of a deceased---Principles; (i) The estate of a deceased person comprises of his moveable and/or immoveable assets, right or benefit which he owned and over which he had complete control and dominion or entitlement to claim the same so as to enter into a transaction of sale, exchange, transfer or gift in respect of them; (ii) The legal heirs of a deceased can inherit only from the estate of the deceased; any property, right or benefit that does not form part of the estate is not inheritable; (iii) The yardstick for establishing what constitutes a deceased's estate is that only such property, right or benefit of a deceased person is inheritable and shall form part of his estate that was in his ownership at the time of death or he had acquired an absolute right in law to claim during his lifetime; conversely, any property, right or benefit which a deceased could not claim in his lifetime shall not form part of a deceased's estate---In the present case, a Succession Certificate was not required and, thus, the Succession Miscellaneous Application filed by the deceased' father was not maintainable in respect of the proceeds of Group Insurance, as the same did not constitute the estate of a deceased under the law---Division Bench of the High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction) being not sustainable---High Court Appeal was disposed of. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Mst. NUSRAT FAREED VS Haji AHMED MUJAHID Ss. 295 & 372---Group Insurance Proceeds, distribution of---Succession application or suit for administration---Maintainability---Deceased was survived by two legal heirs i.e. widow and father---Trial Court, while deciding succession application filed by father, directed distribution of Group Insurance Proceeds between them as per shares prescribed in Sharia---Plea of the appellant (widow), claiming herself to be the sole nominee/beneficiary, was that Trial Court ought to have converted the Succession Application into suit for administration---Held, that the plea of the appellant was flawed as without going into the question of what constituted or qualified as a contentious matter, the object and scope of a suit for administration was to administer the estate of a deceased---Since the Group Insurance Proceeds did not form part of the estate of a deceased, hence for the said reasons a suit for administration also would not lie in respect of it---In the present case, a Succession Certificate was not required and, thus, the Succession Miscellaneous Application filed by the deceased' father was not maintainable in respect of the proceeds of Group Insurance, as the same did not constitute the estate of a deceased under the law---Division Bench of the High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction) being not sustainable---High Court Appeal was disposed of. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Mst. NUSRAT FAREED VS Haji AHMED MUJAHID S. 372---Group Insurance Proceeds, distribution of---Succession application---Maintainability---Absence of nomination---Estate---Scope---Deceased was survived by two legal heirs i.e. widow and father---Trial Court, while deciding succession application filed by father, directed distribution of Group Insurance Proceeds between them as per shares prescribed in Sharia---Appellant (widow) claimed to be the sole nominee/beneficiary entitled to the entire Group Insurance Proceeds---Held, that since the Group Insurance Proceeds of deceased did not fall within the definition of estate, the same was not available for its distribution among the legal heirs and could not devolve on his legal heirs---To grant a succession certificate would mean to hold that Group Insurance Proceeds formed part of the deceased's estate which would in turn mean that Group Insurance Proceeds were liable to be distributed amongst the legal heirs which would be incorrect---Thus, in the present case, a succession certificate was not required and, thus, the Succession Miscellaneous Application filed by the deceased' father was not maintainable in respect of the proceeds of Group Insurance, as the same did not constitute the estate of a deceased under the law---Division Bench of the High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction) being not sustainable---High Court Appeal was disposed of. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Mst. NUSRAT FAREED VS Haji AHMED MUJAHID S. 372---Succession application--- Group insurance Proceeds, distribution of---Estate---Scope Nominee/nomination---Scope---Deceased was survived by two legal heirs i.e. widow and father---Trial Court, while deciding succession application filed by father, directed distribution of Group Insurance Proceeds between them as per shares prescribed in Sharia---Appellant (widow) claimed to be the sole nominee/beneficiary entitled to the entire Group Insurance Proceeds on the basis of the Data Form filled and signed by the deceased in his own handwriting---Held, that the mere act of nomination did not grant a nominee a right in the assets of a deceased person---Role and responsibility of a valid nominee of a deceased person varied with what constitutes the estate of a deceased, that is; i) where the benefits formed part of the estate of a deceased, the nomination merely conferred upon the nominee (whether he be one of the legal heirs of the deceased or not) a limited right and responsibility to collect or receive such amount and distribute the same amongst the legal heirs of the nominator/deceased entitled under the law of succession applicable to the deceased; nomination in such a case could not act to deprive or exclude the legal heirs from their right of inheritance; nomination did not confer or vest any title in favour of the nominee and the latter did not become the owner; nominee was merely a trustee who collects for the benefit of all persons entitled to inherit from the deceased; in short, it merely obviates the necessity of obtaining letters of administration or succession certificates; ii) On the other hand, if the benefits did not form part of the estate of a deceased, then ordinarily it must go to the duly appointed nominee as otherwise it would defeat the purpose and intent of the nomination; the nominee in such a case would be under no obligation to distribute such benefits amongst the legal heirs of a deceased---In the present case, a Succession Certificate was not required and, thus, the Succession Miscellaneous Application filed by the deceased' father was not maintainable in respect of the proceeds of Group Insurance, as the same did not constitute the estate of a deceased under the law---Division Bench of the High Court set aside the impugned order passed by the Single Judge of the High Court (Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction) being not sustainable---High Court Appeal was disposed of.

Mst. NUSRAT FAREED vs Haji AHMED MUJAHID S — 2024 PLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD