Abrar Hussain v. Mst. Bibi Shahida and Others

Title and Citation of the Case

Abrar Hussain v. Mst. Bibi Shahida and Others

PLD 2026 SC 42

Court

Supreme Court of Pakistan

Date of Hearing

29 August, 2025

Judges Present

Athar Minallah

Irfan Saadat Khan

Parties:

Petitioner: Abrar Hussain

Respondent: Mst. Bibi Shahida and others

Background and Facts:

A two member bench of Supreme Court heard an appeal against the impunged order of High Court of Sindh in the second appeal on 4 March 2023. The dispute arose between the petitioner and respondent over a Karachi property which is owned by Irfan Hussain, who died in 2002, related to the family inheritance. Respondent no 1/ Plaintiff sued a case in 2015 by claiming that she was a legal heir of property but the Petitioner/ Defendant no 6 refused to give her. She demanded for distribution, declaration and mense profit and permanent injunction for the property. All the other legal heirs ruled for the Plaintiff.

Petitioner / Defendant no 6 claimed that the property is given by his father in love and affection, during his life time and possession of property  also handed over to him during his lifetime. He supported only two documents for his claim, one is “Iqrar Nama” and second is certificate of possession. Iqrar Nama is lack of witnessses details like CNIC and address. Owner of property also possess property till death which proved by utility bills. Both documents are dubious and unreliable. Petitioner did not prove as genuine documents. Trial court rule for plaintiff and order to divide property among all the legal heirs. After that, petitioner appealed in appellate court under section 96 of CPC, which was dismissed on 23 January 2021. Petitioner appealed second time in High Court of since under section 100 of CPC which was dismissed on 4 April 2023.

Legal issues:

• Whether the property was immediately transferred to legal heirs after death of owner
• Whether prolonged appeals extinguished the inheritance rights of other co-heirs
• Whether the validity of Hiba proved only by Iqrar Nama, which is lack of witnesses CNIC and address, and certificate of possession

Arguments Summary:

Petitioner:

 Petitioner argued that property was given to him, by his father during lifetime for love and affection. He also stated that possession of property also handed over to him during lifetime of his father. In support of his claim, he presented “Iqrar Nama” and certificate of possession which were issued by the Nazim of council.

Respondent:

Respondent no 1 argued that she was a legal heir of property and after death of her father, property was immediately inherited among all the legal heirs but the Petitioner refused to give her share and have illegal possession on property and rent it without the consent of other legal heirs. They demanded distribution, declaration, recovery of mesne profit and permanent injunction. All other legals heirs ruled for Respondent no 1.

Judgement and Reasoning:

Supreme Court highlighted the recent precedent of Federal Shariat court[1] in which declared that the inheritance is a divine right that vested in every legal heir which cannot be directly or indirectly, curtailed.[2] Depriving of women from inheritance is contrary to public policy and social evil.

Supreme Court also highlighted that the property was immediately transferred to all the legal heirs after the death. Ownership of one legal heir does not mean that other legal heirs extinguished from that right. Even the property is gifted, donee have heavy onus to prove the validity of gift. The donor also established date, time and place for Hiba.

Supreme Court also highlighted that the vulnerable families exploited the inheritance rights of women which is totally permissible in law.

Supreme Court uphelds that the Petitioner had failed to prove the previous judgements of trial and appellate courts are lack of any legal conduct. Petitioner only misuse of judicial process which effect the dispensation of justice. Therefore, appeal is dismissed and 500000 rupees imposed on petitioner.

Ratio decidendi:

Supreme Court uphelds that the inheritance is originated from the divine rights. Both women and men have inheritance according to Quran, Sunnah and Shariah Law. Many vulnerable families do no give inheritance to women, it become a societal practice. No one can extinguished women from inheritance, if any one can do, they are accountable before the law. A state who does not safeguard the inheritance rights, they fail to save the principles of equity and justice.

Significance:

This case is important for the immediately transferr of property after the death of owner of that property. It discuss about strict proof for Hiba. It also discuss about the role of courts about social evils about the inheritance rights of women.

Conclusion:

At the end, we can conclude that this case is  about family inheritance. Petitioner appealed in the supreme court by claiming that property is gifted to him and he supported two documents for his claim. While the respondent claimed that she was legal heir or property but petitioner refused to give her. Supreme Court gave reference of judgement of Federal Shariat court and not giving inheritance rights to women is social evil. Petitioner appeal did not based on merits so, this appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court.

Bibliography 

Mst Khalida Azhar v Viqar Rustom Bakhsi and others (2018) SCMR 30

Syeda Fauzia Shah v Federation of Pakistan PLD 2025 FSC 1