NEWANNESS @MEWAJANNESSA versus SHAIKH MOHAMMAD @ AND ORS.

NEWANNESS @MEWAJANNESSA versus SHAIKH MOHAMMAD @ AND ORS.

Under the inheritance provisions in Mulla's Principles of Mohamedan Law: IA was entitled to a 1/6th share of the deceased's estate, divided equally between his widow P-1 and daughter P-2 as per law. For D-5, her two daughters each took a 1/3rd share as sharers, with the remaining 1/3rd as residue, which her full sister P-2 was entitled to as residuary. Delay in substitution of LRs did not abate proceedings since representation by an existing party was sufficient and substitution caused no injustice.

Parties
Appellant: Bibi Mewannessa @ New Anness; Respondent: Shaikh Mohammad @; Respondents: Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 February 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Calcutta High Court Judgment Dated 8.6.1973 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 652 of 1961
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Partition, Inheritance, Shares of Heirs, Legal Representatives, Abatement, Substitution
Personal Law Muslim Law Partition Inheritance Shares of Heirs Legal Representatives Abatement Substitution

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bibi Mewannessa @ New Anness

Appellant

Shaikh Mohammad @

Respondent

Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Calcutta High Court Judgment Dated 8.6.1973 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 652 of 1961

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Entitlement of shares of various heirs under Muslim Law in deceased's inherited property
  2. 2 Whether abatement arises for delay in bringing legal representatives on record when already represented

Ratio Decidendi

Under the inheritance provisions in Mulla's Principles of Mohamedan Law: IA was entitled to a 1/6th share of the deceased's estate, divided equally between his widow P-1 and daughter P-2 as per law. For D-5, her two daughters each took a 1/3rd share as sharers, with the remaining 1/3rd as residue, which her full sister P-2 was entitled to as residuary. Delay in substitution of LRs did not abate proceedings since representation by an existing party was sufficient and substitution caused no injustice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Matter remitted to Trial Court for determination of shares of all contesting parties and distribution according to declared law.
  • No order as to costs.