LHC rules in favour of daughter’s share in estate of deceased father

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has held that it is a settled principle that when fraud is alleged, limitation begins to run from the date of knowledge.

The court also observed that immovable property can be gifted orally, but the donee must establish three ingredients beyond doubt, declaration of gift by the donor, acceptance by the donee and delivery of possession.

The court passed this order in a petition of Mst Rashidaan Bibi who approached the court against the decision of an appellate court which set aside the decision of the trial court by virtue of which the petitioner seeking cancellation of Tamleek Mutation was decreed in favour of her brother Abdul Sattar.

The court observed that the appellate court erred in reversing these findings without any valid legal justification.

The court; therefore, set aside the judgement and the decree passed by the appellate court and restored decision of the trial court.

The court observed that the trial court has rightly relied upon the judgment rendered by this court, wherein it was held that a gift transaction, particularly one aimed at excluding legal heirs, must be proved with strict compliance of the legal requirements and any deviation renders the gift void. In the present case, all three essential ingredients are lacking in evidence, and the surrounding circumstances strongly suggest that the alleged Tamleek was nothing more than a colourable device to deprive lawful heirs of their inheritance, the court added.

The trial court rightly held while deciding the issue that the suit was within time, as the petitioner gained knowledge of the fraudulent Tamleek after the death of her father Ashraf Ali, which finding was upheld by the appellate court, the court added.

The record shows that the petitioner pleaded specific facts regarding fraud, collusion with the revenue staff, the physical incapacity of the donor, and forged thumb impressions, the court noted.

The petitioner also appeared and reaffirmed these facts on oath, thereby discharging the initial burden. It was then for the donee to prove the genuineness of the Tamleek, which he failed to do, the court observed.

The court observed that the alleged justification for disinheriting the real daughters on the ground of love and affection is seriously questionable. Even if the purported intention behind the Tamleek was claimed to be pious, it is inconceivable how depriving daughters of their Shariah-mandated inheritance could be treated as an act of virtue, the court added.

The Holy Quran unequivocally guarantees the rights of daughters in their father’s estate. Any attempt to defeat this divine commandment through a dubious transaction is not legally sustainable, the court concluded.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025