DEEN MOHAMMAD Vs. RESHMI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in the present Regular Second Appeal is to the impugned judgments and decrees dated 8.10.2010 and 4.3.2014, whereby the suit filed on behalf of the appellant seeking declaration that he is owner in possession of land measuring 23 kanals 4 marlas, i.e., the suit property and as well as challenge to the decree dated 30.5.1998 passed in Civil Suit No. 161 of 1997 has been dismissed by both the Courts below. Mr. Jagdeep Singh Virk, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant -plaintiff submits that the declaration was sought with regard to the property left by Mol Deen son of Nabia, real uncle of the appellant, on the basis of customary law, according to which, on death of the owner, the property goes to his male heir, i.e., the appellant being collateral and the same will not be inherited by the daughters/female heirs and, therefore, the appellant is entitled to get the suit property. In this regard, he has referred Para 23 of the Rattigon's Digest, which reads thus: - collateral

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant further submits that both the Courts below have misinterpreted the provisions of Rattigon's Digest and, thus, committed an illegality and perversity and, therefore, the following substantial questions of law arise for determination in the present appeal: -

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have appraised the paper book.