PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Mst. SADIQAN BEGUM vs MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE Inheritance — 2025 CLC 1158 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2025 CLC 1158 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2025
Reporter
CLC
Parties
Mst. SADIQAN BEGUM vs MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE Inheritance
Subject matter
Civil

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

Judgment text as reported

Mst. SADIQAN BEGUM VS MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE Inheritance---Oral gift---Deceptive mechanism to usurp inheritance share of female legal heirs---Proof---Threshold test---Legal standards for validating oral gifts---Scope---In our society there has been an unstoppable bent to invent grotesque devices conceived to deprive daughters, sisters, mothers, widows, orphans etc of their share of inheritance; the 'Oral Gift' being the most fancied of all, employed by unscrupulous male members of the family---It is for this reason that there is overwhelming settled jurisprudence in this country to arrest all such emblems of frauds, forgery, impersonations and uncalled for persuasions, nevertheless, the menace continues---The threshold tests of such transactions are now etched in our jurisprudence as tablet of stone, hardly requiring any further quest, however, if one needs reiteration, following principles be strictly adhered to, particularly in the context of the case in hand: (i) Beneficiary of the impugned transaction of gift/transfer of immovable property(s) bears the heavy onus to prove the transaction; (ii) The beneficiary of a gift has to plead and prove three mandatory ingredients of gift i.e. declaration/offer by the donor, acceptance of gift by the donee; and, delivery of possession under the gift; (iii) The possession of immovable property by one of the siblings/LRs to the exclusion of others will be treated as constructive possession on behalf of all others, unless proved otherwise ; (iv) In case of oral transactions, it is mandatory for a beneficiary of oral transaction to prove the same through positive evidence by supplying mandatory material particulars in the pleadings i.e. the time and date, the venue, and the persons/witnesses in whose presence the alleged transaction was brought about; (v) The oral transaction of transfer of immovable property, be it sale, gift/tamleek, surrender or will etc. has to be proved separately from its incorporation/attestation in revenue record by way of sanctioning of the mutation since a mutation cannot by itself be considered a document of title; (vi) Where a gift, which excluded a legal heir, irrespective of whether such transaction is evidenced by registered deed, the donee is required to prove original transaction and must justify the disinheritance of a legal heir from the estate; (vii) Parties are bound by their pleadings; no amount of evidence can be led beyond the scope of pleadings; and in case any such evidence is brought on record, the Court cannot consider and rely upon the same and has to discard it; (viii) Mere efflux of time does not extinguish the right of inheritance, thus, the question of limitation in case of inheritance and fraud is not attracted and becomes insignificant.

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLC

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English