Preface

158
contradict the provision of Sharia. If the mother said the property should not be
sold and beneficiaries disputed that the idea of not selling cannot hold.
On section 33 of the constitution cited by the counsel of the appellant the
learned counsel dispelled his submission as a mare misconception. He said there is
no evidence suggesting discrimination against the appellant. There is nothing in the
judgment discriminating any of the heirs. On the submission of the counsel of the
appellant that the Cadi should have determined the shares of the parties the learned
counsel said that determination of shares is Qur'anic injunction the Cadi has no
business there, what he can only do is to give declaratory decision on that.
On a sketch plan submitted by the counsel of the appellant to this court the
learned counsel said that the plan does not show the share of each heir. The learned
counsel further conceded to the idea of showing the appellant's own share but to
insist on his physical share is ridiculous. The effect of plotting out appellant's
physical share on the ground will only result in causing harm to other beneficiaries
which injunction of a prophetic tradition says should be avoided.
Finally, the learned counsel rounded up by saying that the reasoning of the
lower court is sound enough to warrant confirming its judgment.
At this juncture and under the impression of a reply on point of law the
appellants counsel chipped in and said that to say plotting of physical share of the
appellant will harm other heirs is a professional idea which can only be proved by
a surveyor.
Having carefully and meticulously gone through the record of proceedings
of the lower court and submissions of the learned counsel to the parties before us I
find it pertinent and desirable for easy and just determination of this case to