LAW AND JUSTICE: ABOUT LAW ASSIGNMRNT

Contents:

1 .Introduction

2. Objective of the assignment.

3. Definition of the doctrine of representation.

4. Background of enacting section -4 of MFLO-1961.

5. General discussion of section-4.

6. Advantages of section -4 of MFLO -1961.

7. Bad impact of section -4 of MFLO-1961.

8. Provable solution.

9. Conclusion.

10. Bibliography.

Introduction:

The dilemma of inheritance of grandchildren from pre –deceased child is one of the most of the critical area of interpretations Islamic law. The Islamic law of inheritance does not recognize representation. The son of a deceased person shall not represent such person if he died before his father. He shall not stand in the same place as deceased would have done had he been living, but shall be excluded from the inheritance if he have paternal uncle. Pakistan brought a significant change in 1961 by section 4 of the Muslim family law ordinance, which is a milestone event in the history of reformation of Islamic law, which has recognized the doctrine of representation. In Bangladesh the same law has become accepted through the promulgation of the laws continuance enforcement order, 1971.

Objects of the assignment:

1. To find out the background of enacting section -4 of MFLO, 1961.

2. To find out those places where have been interfered in the Muslim succession law by the section -4.

3. To find out the advantages of section -4.

4. To find out the bad impact of the section -4

5. And to find out the provable solution this problem.

Definition of the doctrine of representation:

Asaf . A.A Fyzee says that the word ‘representation ‘has several meanings in law. For instance, we may speak of representation to the estate of a deceased man, and in this context we speak of ‘personal representatives ‘I, e., executors or administrators. The second meaning is the process whereby one person is said to represents the share receivable by him through another person; who has himself an heir .Here we are concerned with this second meaning.

Take the example of D, the deceased person, having two sons A, and, B.the second son B dies in the lifetime of D,and a son;,X.

(A.A.Asaf Fyzee, Outlines of

Muhammad law p.392)

Representation means a man dies leaving behind a son and grandson through a predeceased son, the grandson is totally excluded by the son in Islamic law of inheritance. This is based on the cardinal principle that the nearer degree to the deceased excludes the same classes of heirs. In recent times some Muslim states have modified the traditional Islamic law by a new principle which is called doctrine of representation.

(Www. Google.com)

Background of enacting section -4 of MFLO

, 1961:

This law was in fact passed as a consequence of the report of the commission on marriage and family laws .on the 4^th of august 1955,then the government of Pakistan formed a seven member commission on marriage and family laws to analyze the provision with special emphasis to the protection of the women’s right .It is event the technically speaking , from the terms of reference .that the commission was not authorized to make comments regarding the problem of succession of orphaned grandchildren .However the commission made the suggestion for the incorporation of the representational rule of succession of the orphaned grandchildren .

(The gazette of Pakistan, extraordinary publication, Karachi, Thursday, august, 30, 1956)

Section -4 0f MFLO1961:

Government of Pakistan

Ministry of law

Ordinance no.VIII of 1961

Rawalpindi,the 2^nd march1961

Ordinance

To give effect to certain recommendations of the commission on marriage and family laws.

Sec.1. Short title, extent, application and commencement –

(a) This ordinance may be called the Muslim family laws ordinance,1961

Sec.4. succession – In the event of the death of any son of daughter of the propositus before the opening of the succession, the children of such son or daughter, if any, living at the time the succession opens, shall per stripes receive as hare equivalent to the share which such son or daughter, as the case may be, would have received if alive.

Advantages of doctrine of representation:

Because of the two fundamental principles of Islamic law of succession, exclusion based on hierarchy of degree and nearness of relationship, under certain circumstance, the predeceased child of a deceased person could not get property under shariah law of inheritance. For example, if someone died leaving one son and one sons son from another predeceased son, then according to the classical shariah law of inheritance the son will entire property and sons son will be totally excluded. Undoubtedly such law causes hardships the to the descendent of the predeceased children.

Thus in order to remove the sufferings caused to such orphaned grandchildren, section 4 of the Muslim family ordinance, 1961was passed.

The Qur’an puts much emphasis on the welfare of the orphans. But it has not been substantiated that the doctrine of representation is only the way to ensure the welfare of the orphan children.

There no Quranic verse or Hadith establishing exclusion of the said grandchildren. It was argued that the existing rule of exclusion has in fact been taken from the customs of then Arab society before the advent of Islam. So the doctrine of representation did not violet the Islamic rules.

The doctrine of representation is an alterative solution that was suggested by some persons. That is to make a; will, by the grandfather in the favour of the said grandchildren.

Impact or disadvantages of section -4 MFLO; 1961:

Undoubtedly, section -4 is one of the most reformations done in the area of the Islamic law of succession. The impact of the section -4 of the Muslim family law ordinance, 1961 upon shariah laws of inheritance is to be analyzed properly. This particular provision encapsulated in section 4, in fact, adversely affected certain fundamental principles of Islamic law of inheritance. Some of instances are ………

Violation of order of priority among different classes of heirs:

For the purpose of distribution of property of the property among the heirs, Islamic law of inheritance classifies them into three broad categories in order of priority. They are the sharers, agnatic heirs and distant kindred. The legal order of distribution among them is that the property will go to the sharers first, and the residue property wick be distributed among the agnatic heirs in order of priority intra classes. Thus groups one and two may get the property at the same time one after another, since the first group does not exclude the second group rather just takes precedence over the other. The heir who is grouped as distant kindred can succeed only in the absence of the heirs of the first two groups except the husband or widow. Thus, each heir of the first two groups except husband and widow excludes any distant kindred totally. In other words, distant kindred can not get any property in presence of any sharer or agnatic heir except the husband and widow. This is the basis of exclusion of the heirs which forms the first basis of exclusion. This order of priority is totally diminished by section 4 of the MFLO 1961. Thus under MFLO, even distant kindred, e. g. daughter’s son or daughter’s daughter, gets the property with the heirs of the first and second group.

Under Sharia: A distant kindred is excluded by sharer or asaba.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Son Daughter	Res	Son is originally an asaba and the daughter has been converted into residuary by the son.
Daughter’s Daughter	Excluded	The heirs of the superior classes (both sharer and asaba) are present.

Under MFLO:A distant kindred succeeds with sharer or asaba.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Son Daughter Daughter’s Daughter	Res	Son is originally an asaba and the daughter has been converted into residuary by the son. Daughter’s treated as a daughter.

Under MFLO, distant kindred not only may inherit with sharer and asaba but even sometimes may exclude a sharer.

Under Sharia: A distant kindred is excluded by a sharer.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Uterine brother and uterine sister	1/ 3 increases to the whole by Radd	As sharer, they are more than one in number and no excluder to them is present.
Daughter Daughter’s	Excluded	The sharers are present who exclude all distant kindred.

Under MFLO: A distant kindred even may exclude a sharer.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
UB and US		Daughter’s daughter is treated as daughter and so she excludes them like the daughter.
Daughter’s Daughter	½ that increases to the whole by Rada.	Since she is getting the property of the daughter.

2. Violation of the fundamental principle of distribution between male and female in the ratio of 2:1:

The Holy Qur”an clearly declared that “a male receives a share equal to that of two females; 11 Thus, the son will get double of daughter’s share. It will not be applicable between son and son’s daughter, because they do not belong to the same class and the term ‘walad” used by the Qur”anic verse either mean “child” or “son” s xhils” , but in the same case it can not be used for both the meaning. However, this Qur”anic principle which forms an important rule of Islamic law of inheritance has been clearly affected by the provisions of section 4.For example,

Under MFLO: male and female get equal share violating Qur’anic principle of distribution.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Son’s son (offspring of the pre – deceased son 1)	½ as residuary	Representing his father (PDS1)
Son’s daughter (offspring of the pre – deceased son 2)	½ as residuary	Representing his father (PDS2)

In the above case, son’s daughter is getting ½ in the representative capacity of her father though she is a female, whereas Qur’an clearly says about the personal capacity. Interestingly, if both of them would be the odd spring of the same pre-deceased son, then their position under sharia and MELO would have been same. For example,

Both under sharia and MFLO: male is getting double share of the female.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Son’s son (of pre – deceased son 1)	2/3 as residuary	Representing his father (PDS1)
Son’s daughter (of pre – deceased son 1)	1/3 as residuary	Representing his father (PDS 1)

Thus, if we consider above two son’s daughters, each of them in fact enjoys the same identity, that is son’s daughter, and sharia also treats each of them in the same way; whereas MFLO distinguished between these two because of the application of the doctrine of representation. This is the double standard taken by the MFLO towards the same kind of heir.

3. Violation of the fundamental principle pf hierarchy pf degree:

Islamic law of succession recognizes the principle of hierarchy of degree by which nearer in degree excludes more remote. Thus the nearness of the relationship forms the prior claim to get the property.

However, this rule is not strictly applicable on Sunni school, as the daughter does not exclude the son’s son, and thus it applied only in the same class of heirs. But, it is true that under Shia school even the daughter excludes son’s son.

Under MFLO: Violation of the principle of hierarchy of degree.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Son	½ as residuary	As asaba
Son’s Son	½ as residuary	Representing his father (PDS) whereas he would be totally excluded by Sharia because of the hierarchy of degree by the presence of son.

4. Creates new methodology of distribution:

Under sharia law, everyone gets the property in his or her own capacity. But p0f section

Creates new methodology of distribution:

Under sharia law, everyone gets the property in his or her own capacity. But p0f section 4 is applied, and then every child of the pre – deceased child will get the property in a representative capacity always. Thus, it will create a completely new mode of distribution. The innovative line will be clear from the following example:

MFLO: introduces new scheme of distribution

Heir	Share under MFLO	Share under Sharia
Son’s son (of PDS 1) Son’s son (of PDS 1)	½ representing their father PDS1, each gets 1/4	All will be converted into residuary together to be divided the whole property among them equally, each gets 1/3 at his inde3pendent capacity.
Son’s son (of PDS 2)	½ representing their father PDS2

In the above examples, someone dies leaving 2 son’s sons from his first pre – deceased son and 1 son’s. sharia treats them equally as each of them gets property in his independent capacity. But, the MFLO distributes the property to them as the representatives of their deceased father, thus, interestingly; MFLO has become discriminatory towards the sons of the same grade under the similar circumstance. Probably, the persons who advocated for making such a rule they even could not contemplate of such an anomalous situation, though they always tried to portray their report to had been made based on equity and just principles.

5. Unnecessary interference under certain circumstances:

There are many cases where the orphaned grandchildren are not deprived even under sharia law. But, section 4 becomes applicable everywhere irrespective of their exclusion. For example, if someone dies leaving one daughter and one son’s son, then according to sharia the daughter will get ½ as a sharer and the rest ½ will go to the son’s son .But MFLO modifies it and accordingly, daughter will get 1/3 and the son’s son gets 2/3 .there is no logical basis for bringing such a change. The objective of the law was to save the orphaned grandchildren from deprivation, but there is no specification made in the said law that it will be applicable in the cases where the orphaned grandchildren will be deprived according to the regular rules of distribution. The law was spoilt in such a way that gives the impression that as if such grandchildren are always totally deprived under the sharia law. But, the fact is different. F. M. Kulay has made the point very clear with specific statistic. He argues that the concern of the orient lists and the apologetic. Modern and progressive Muslims for the orphaned grandson is misplaced. ’13 kulay pointed out that there are 27 and leaving aside the two cases of emancipated slaves 25 possible situations in which a grandsons, in 14 the grandson inherits the whole property excluding others totally; in 10 he inherits one – third or more; and only in one dictation where there is a surviving son, whether his father or uncle , of representational rule upsets the whole structure of sharia law. Carlson rightly pointed out that ‘because the Pakistani rule of representational succession by not confined to cases where the grandchildren would otherwise be excluded from succession, it brings about radical changes in the structure of inheritance, affecting not only the heirs’ quantum of entitlement but also their priorities.

6. It diminishes the differences between male and female heirs and also undermines the superior female heir:

Under the MFLO, the son’s son and son’s daughter enjoy the same status, as each of them is treated as representative of his/her father and thus enjoys the status of a son. Anomalously, it is still recognizing the fundamental difference between son and daughter at next level. This double standard affects other heirs which sometimes even undermines the superior female heir (daughter) both in status and proportion of the entitlement in comparison to other female heirs from the pre –deceased son of inferior status. If some one dies leaving a daughter and a brother, then the daughter will get ½ and the brother will get another half as a residuary. This Sharia rule is still applicable. Instead of this daughter, if there is a daughter from the pre –deceased son, then the distribution remains same as she gets ½ and the rest goes to brother according to Sharia. But in the second case, according to section 4 of the MFLO, son’s daughter will get the whole property excluding brother totally. This is an anomaly in the sense that while daughter is not excluding brother, son’s daughter is excluding him and she is getting also more property than the daughter. Thus the son’s daughter is awarded with a superior status even than the daughter. If they really did not prefer any difference between male and female, then paradoxical stand is seen when they give such preference still to the son’s daughter only due to the reason for her being the daughter of a son. If in such a case, daughter then she would not exclude brother even according to MFLO, because she is the daughter of a daughter. Thus it seems that their idea was not based on any clear standpoint, and thus it resulted to a number of anomalies and contradictions.

7. Abolishes the original status of the son’s daughter as a sharer with the impact of reducing the number of ‘Qur’anic heirs’ from 12to 11:

Under MFLO the status of son’s daughter has been changed and now she is always enjoying the status of an agnatic heir representing the son and gets the counterpart. Thus, in no case now the son’s daughter first class. Because, section 4 generally applied the even if she is not excluded by the Sharia, still the MFLO will be applicable and will confer with her the hypothetical status of her dead father. In practice, by the application of section 4 son”s daughter will never get any property as a sharer in her own capacity. So, become eleven, which is contradictory to the established number of sharers for long as twelve.

8. Violates the principle of ‘Tasib’:

Son’s daughter is originally a sharer and by tasib she is converted into a residuary only by her male counterpart and gets the residue. Thus, under sharia law according to the doctrine of tasib a son’s daughter can never be an asaba in her own without her male counterpart, whereas under MFLO she is always treated as an asaba in her own even in the absence of any of her male counter parts. Following miscellaneous points are also worth mentioning here to assess the real impact of section 4 on Islamic Law of Inheritance:

1) Daughter’s daughter and daughter’s son each of them is a distant kindred, belongs to the third category of the heirs, enjoying the status of a daughter.

2) Interestingly, sometimes by the application of section 4, the property of the children from the pre –deceased children may be reduced from the sharia allocated for them. A dies leaving one ss from PDSI and 2 ss from PDS2 .In this case, according to sharia, each of them will get 1/3 while according to MFLO son of the PDSI will get ½ and each of the other 2 ss will get 1/4 . Thus MFLO is making a clear discrimination by doing different treatment with sons of the same type, again, if the PDS2 has lss and 1 sd then, according to sharia each ss (both of PDS1 AND PDS2)will get 2/5 and the sd will get 1/5. But, in such a case, according to MFLO son of the PDS1 will get ½, son of the PDS2 will get 1/3 and the sd will get 1/6 . thus, the ss from PDS1 is given priority as he gets more than other ss and other ss’s portion has also been reduced from 2/5 to 1/3 ,as well as sd’s portion has also been reduced from 1/5 to 1/6 . These are the clear weak points of the law, which were even not contemplated by the advocates of this theory who recommended for this legislation. Thus, the criticism that the system of obligatory bequeath up to one third done in Egypt becomes very inadequate portion in case of having children from four pre- deceased children alive along with only one son, becomes obsolete, as the same may happen also under certain other circumstances even by the application of MFLO.

3) It reduces sometimes the property of the widow or husband unnecessarily and increases the property of daughter’s children who already got property of daughter’s children who already got property under sharia Following are the illustrations of such anomalous cases:

Conclusion:

To conclude, it appears that the concept of the representation as has been important by section 4 of the Muslim family law ordinance, 1961 has in itself intrinsic conflict with Islamic law of succession. It upsets the whole structure of Islamic law inheritance .it also violates the rule of istihad, as an ijtihad cannot be done that results violation of any Qur’anic verse. At same time, it created injustice to others by concentrating justice only to the orphaned grandchildren. In doing so, it created more problems than solution. Unnecessary interference is another great defect of this law as in many cases it provides a new scheme of distribution for the orphaned grandchildren though they were not actually deprived under the existing shariah law.

Bibliography:

1. Coulson,N.J., Succession in the Muslim family law ,Cambridge University Press,1971

2. AsafA.A.Fyzee., Outlines of Mohammedan law, Oxford University Press1964,1974 .

3. Syed Khalid Rashid,s., Muslim law,Eastern book company ,Lucknow.

4. Dr.Muhammad Faiz-ud-din,.Islamic law, Shams publications.

5. Muhammad Ekramul Haque ,.Islamic law of Inheritance rules and calculations, Published by London College of Legal Studies (South)Dhaka, Bangladesh.

6. Www.Google.com.

7. M.Habibur Rahaman, Muslim law .

8. Pro.A.K.M. Mniruzzaman, Fraaej Ain (Muslim, Hindu, Boudha,Khrishtan and succession Act,1925).

9. Government of Pakistan,Ministry of law,ordinance no.VII of 1961, Rawalpindi, the 2^nd march 1961.

Under Sharia: Husband gets ½ in the absence of any child or son’s child.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Husband	½	As sharer, because there is no child or son’s child.
DD Or DS	R (1/2)	As zabil arham in the absence of any sharer or agnatic heir except the husband. Thus , though she is a deceased daughter, still she is not excluded, half of the whole property under the present circumstance.

Under MFLO: Husband gets ¼ even in the absence of any child or son’s child.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Husband	¼	As sharer, though there is no child or son’s child, but there is a daughter’s daughter /DS who is presumed to be a daughter and thus she reduces the share of husband like the daughter.
Daughter’s daughter Or Daughter’s son	½ increases to ¾ by radd	As sharer represnting her mother she gets property like a saughter who gets ½ in the any son if she becomes single. Then following Sharia principle of Radd she is getting the residue property which have been added as additional with her original share. Thus , she is taking advantages tuom both sharia and MFLO,while husband’s property is being reduced without any justification

Sharia: Wife get’s ¼ in the absence of any child or son’s child.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Wife	¼	As sharer, because there is no child or son’s child.
Daughter’s daughter Or Daughter’s son	Residue(3/4)	As zabil arham in the absence of any sharer or agnatic heir except the husband.

Under MFLO: Husband gets ¼ even in the absence of any child or son’s child.

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Wife	1/8	As sharer, though there is no child or son’s child, but there is a daughter’s daughter /DS who will represent the daughter and thus she reduces the share of husband like the daughter.
Daughter’s daughter Or Daughter’s son	½ increases to 7/8 by radd	As sharer representing her mother she gets property like a daughter who gets ½ in the absence of any son if she becomes single.

4) It sometimes reduces even the share of the mother violating the original principles of Islamic law of succession. It also affects the father, reducing his portion ultimately. For example,

Under sharia: daughter’s daughter does not reduce mother’s share..

Heir	Share	Reasoning
Mother	1/3	There is no child or son’s child and no collaterals.
Father	Residue	As asaba, since there is no child or son’s child.
DD	Excluded	Being distant kindred in presence of the sharer and asaba.

Probable solution:

There is an alternative solution that was suggested by some person that is to make a Will” by the grandfather in favour of the said grandchildren. It does not affect the sharia law of succession as section 4 of the MFLO does affect.

A ‘Will’ must be made as follows, no ‘Will’ for more then one-third of the property or anything in favour of any heir who succeeds, then in no way it hampers the succession law.

The advantages of such device are that—firstly, this system of Will may be made applicable in those cases where the said grandchildren are excluded only. So if any grandchildren of any predeceased child gets property under the original scheme of sharia law of inheritance, this rule of obligatory bequeath will not be applicable.

Secondly, it solves the problem following a different device, so in no way it affects the sharia law of inheritance.

Thirdly, no question of being affected of other heirs arises, unlike MFLO. It does not abrogate the male-female ratio of the property as it is an independent way of solving the problem, as that rule is applicable only in the case of succession. Thus, it appears that following this device any clash with the Quranic verses regarding inheritance may be avoided technically. This is the great advantage of this formula

1. shares allotted to the husband:

There are two situation :(a) ½ (b) ¼

(a) Husband is entitled to ½ of the property of fulfillment of only one condition; the deceased leaves no child or son’s child how low so ever.

Example; husband- ½

Father- residuary

(b) Husband is entitled to ¼ of the property of fulfillment only one condition; the deceased have any child or son’s child how low so ever.

Example; husband- ¼

Son – residuary

2. Shares allotted to the wife:

(a) There are two situation; ¼ wife is entitled to ¼ of the property on fulfillment of only one condition the deceased leaves no child or sons child how low so ever.

Example: wife – ¼

Father – residuary

(b) Wife is entitled to ⅛ of the property on fulfillment of only one condition the deceased leaves any child or sons child how low so ever.

Example: wife- ⅛

Son- residuary

3. Shares allotted to the father:

There are three situation; 1/6, 1/6+residue, residue.

(a) Father is entitled to 1/6 of the property on fulfillment of only one condition if there is any son or sons son or how low so ever.

Example:

Father -1/6

Son-residuary.

(b) Father is entitled to 1/6 and residue property on fulfillment of the following conditions;

There are one or more daughter or sons daughters.

There is no son or sons.

Example;

Father-1/6 and residue

Daughter-1/2

Example;

Father – residue

Mother -1/3

4. Share allotted to the Mother:

There are three situation; 1/6, 1/3, 1/3 of residue.

(a) Mother is entitled to 1/6 of the property in any of the following two conditions.

1. There is a child or son’s child how low so ever.

2. There are two or more brothers or sisters whether full, consanguine or uterine even one brother and one sister whether full, consanguine or uterine.

Example:

Mother – 1/6

Son – residue

(b) Mother is entitled to 1/3 of the property on fulfillment of the following conditions;

1. There is no child or sons child.

2. Not more then one brother or one sister.

Example;

Mother – 1/3

Brother – residue

(c) Mother is entitled to 1/3 of what remains after deducting the wife’s or husbands share on fulfillment of the following three conditions;

1. There is no child or son’s child.

2. Not more then one brother or one sister.

3. There is wife or husband along with the father.

Example;

Father

Mother

Husband

5. Shares allotted to the daughter:

A daughter is a primary heir who is never be excluded by any one.There are three situation; ½, ⅔ and residue.

(a) Daughter is entitled to ½ of the property of fulfillment of the following two conditions…

1. The deceased have no son.

2. She is only one number.

Example;

Daughter – ½

Wife – 1/8

Father – 1/6

(b) Daughters are entitled to 2/3 of the property collectively on fulfillment of following two conditions.

1. The deceased leaves no son.

2. The daughters are more than one in number; two or more daughter must be there.

Example;

Two daughters – 2/3

Wife – 1/8

Father – 1/6+r

Example;

Son -2/3

Daughter – 1/3

6. Shares allotted to the grandfather:

A grandfather is a secondary Quranic heir. Some times he is to be excluded. There are three situations;1/6, 1/6+r and residue.

(a) A grandfather is entitled to 1/6 of property on fulfillment of following two conditions;

1. There is any son or sons how low so ever.

2. There is no father or nearer grandfather.

Example;

GF.1/6

Son – 5/6

(b) The grandfather is entitled to 1/6+r of property when there is one or more daughter or sons daughter how low so ever, there is no son or sons son and there is no father or nearer grandfather.

Example;

Son’s daughter – ½

Gf...1/6+r

Example;

Wife – ¼

GF – r=3/4

7. Share allotted to the full sister:

There are three situation; ½, 2/3 and residue.

(a) Full sister is entitled to ½ of the property on fulfillment of the following conditions;

1. She is one number.

2. Following heirs shall not be present child, child of a son how low so ever, father, true grand father and brother.

Example;

Husband – ½

Full sister – ½

(b) Full sisters are entitled to 2/3 of the property if full sisters are two or more in number and there is no child, child of a son, father and grand father.

Example;

Two full sister – 2/3

Uterine sister – 1/3

Example;

F. S. 1/3

F. B. 2/3

(d) Note (full sister is also converted into accompany residuary with daughter and sons daughter.

Example;

F.S – R

Daughter – ½

Full sister is excluded by the son, son’s son, father and grandfather.)

8. Shares allotted to the consanguine sister:

There are seven condition; ½, 2/3, 1/6, exclusion, defecto exclusion, residue and accompany residue.

(a) consanguine sister is entitled to ½ of the property on the fulfillment of following conditions;

1. she is one in number .

2. following heirs shall not be present child, sons child, father, grand father, full brother, full sister and consanguine brother.

Example;

Husband – ½

C.S – ½

(b) If they two or more they get 2/3 of the property.

Example;

Two c.s – 2/3

u.s – 1/3

1. There is only one full sister.

2. The full sister will take property as a sharer

3. She or they is or are not otherwise excluded from inheritance or converted into residuary.

Example;

F. S – ½

C. S – 1/6

U. S – 1/3

(d) A consanguine sister is converted into residuary with consanguine brother subject to not being excluded other wise.

Example;

C. B – R

C. S – R

F. S – ½

(e) A consanguine sister is converted into accompany residuary with daughter and sons daughter subject to not being excluded other wise and full sister.

Example;

Wife – 1/8

Daughter – ½

C.S – R

(f) Consanguine sinter is excluded by son, son’s son, grand father, full brother and more then one full sister.

Example;

C. S – ex.

Son - r

(g) Consanguine sister is also excluded when full sister succeeds as residuary.

Example;

Wife – 1/8

Daughter – ½

Full sister – r

C. S - excluded

9. Shares allotted to the uterine brother and sister:

There are two situations 1/6, 1/3

(a) Uterine brother and sister are entitled to 1/6 of the property on fulfillment of two conditions;

1. He or she is only one in number.

2. Following heirs are shall not be present child, child of a son, father, and grand father.

Example;

U. S - 1/6

F. S – ½

C. S – 1/6

Mother – 1/6

(b) Uterine brothers and sisters are entitled to 1/3 of the property if there are two or more in number.

Example;

Two U. S – 1/3

F. S – ½

C. S – 1/6

10. Shares allotted to the sons daughter:

There are five situations ½, 2/3, 1/6, residue and exclusion.

(a) Son’s daughter is entitled to ½ of the property on fulfillment of following conditions;

1. She is only one number.

2. There is no son or son’s son.

Example;

Husband – ¼

Father – 1/6+r

Mother – 1/6

Son’s daughter – ½

(b) Son’s daughters are entitled to 2/3 of the property if they are two or more.

Example;

Husband – ¼

Father – 1/6+r

Mother – 1/6

Two son’s daughter – 2/3

(c) Son’s daughter is entitled to 1/6 of the property if she or they are with one daughter and there is no son and son’s son.

Example;

Wife – 1/8

Father – 1/6+r

Daughter – ½

Sons’ daughter – 1/6

(d) Son’s daughter is converted into residuary with son’s son.

Example;

Wife – 1/8

Father – 1/6

Daughter – ½

Sons son – r

Sons daughter – r

(e) Son’s daughter is excluded by son and two daughters.

Example;

Son – r

Daughter – r

Son’s daughter – ex

Note; if two daughters with sons son and sons daughter the sons son and sons daughter will be residuary.

11. Shares allotted to the grand mother:

(a) Grand mother will entitled to 1/6 of the property in the absence of the following heir’s mother, nearer paternal true grand mother and nearer maternal true grand mother.

Example;

M. G. M – 1/6

S. – R

F. - 1/6

(b) Paternal grand mother will be entitled to 1/6 of the property in the absence of following heir’s mother, nearer maternal grand mother, nearer paternal grand mother, father and intermediate true grand father.

Example;

P. G. M – 1/6

S. – R

Doctrine of awl.

The term awl literally means increase or excess. If the sum total of the fractions exceed than the unity that situation is technically termed as the case of awl. The methodology by which such awl case is solved is known as the doctrine of awl. In such case the fractions of each share is reduced proportionately to adjust the sum total of fractions with the unity.

Example; husband –

Father – 1/6+r

Mother –1/6

Daughter – 1/2

Son’s daughter – 1/6

Doctrine of radd

The Arabic term radd literally means return back. If the sum of total of the fractions in a case less then unity, then the residue property comes back proportionately to the sharers again in excess of their original shares, this process is technically termed as radd or return back. This is the opposite case of awl.

Example;

Mother –

Daughter –

Another example;

Husband –

Mother –

Son’s daughter –

LAW AND JUSTICE

Earn money on-line

ABOUT LAW ASSIGNMRNT

2 comments:

my photos

Followers

MY SCHOOL