Daughter Cannot Be Excluded As Legal Heir In Revenue Records Without Valid Justification: J&K&L High Court
The case in question involved a petitioner who had sought to transfer ownership of his deceased father’s property solely to himself, excluding his sister from the inheritance.
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that a mutation of property records, which excludes a legal heir without providing valid reasons, is invalid and can be annulled. The court further emphasized that such a mutation could be challenged regardless of any time limitations typically imposed on such disputes.
The case in question involved a petitioner who had sought to transfer ownership of his deceased father’s property solely to himself, excluding his sister from the inheritance. The Court noted that while both the petitioner and the respondent (the petitioner’s sister) were legal heirs to the property under Muslim Personal Law, the mutation record reflected that only the petitioner was granted ownership, without any legitimate explanation for the exclusion of the sister.
A Bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani said, “Since record does not reveal as to why respondent 3 herein was excluded to inherit her father and under what circumstances mutation 804 came to be attested in her absence, it can safely be said that the said mutation has been attested in breach and violation of the law of succession under Muslim Personal Law, inasmuch as the provisions of Standing Order 23-A.”
The Court observed that there was no evidence to suggest that the sister had voluntarily relinquished her inheritance rights, nor was there any indication that customary law applied to this particular situation. The absence of these justifications made the mutation process legally invalid, as it did not comply with the law of succession under Muslim Personal Law or the regulations outlined in Standing Order 23-A, which governs the procedure for attesting mutations.
The Court upheld the finance commissioner’s decision, which had previously set aside the contested mutation. This ruling did not grant the sister immediate ownership of the property but directed that the matter be reconsidered by the revenue officer. The court clarified that the case should be reviewed in accordance with Muslim Personal Law and the procedures stipulated in Standing Order 23-A, giving the petitioner a chance to respond to the claims made by the sister.
The petitioner had earlier challenged the finance commissioner’s order in the High Court, seeking to reinstate the mutation in his name. However, the Court found that the finance commissioner’s order was sound, as it was consistent with the legal framework governing inheritance. The Court rejected the petitioner’s claims, stating that the exclusion of the sister from the inheritance was done without legal grounds, and no procedural requirements were met.
In the end, the High Court dismissed the petitioner’s appeal, reaffirming that the mutation was invalid and needed to be reconsidered in a lawful manner, following the established guidelines for inheritance under Muslim Personal Law.
Cause Title: Mohammad Maqbool v. State of J&K & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Gaash Asrar-ul Haq
Respondents: Advocates Hakim Aman Ali, W.M. Shah
