The onus is on a sister or a sister's son to prove their right of succession as against near and possibly even remote collaterals. but in the absence of any agnatic heirs their right to succeed appears to be preferable to the rights of the proprietary body as Government especially in villages which are not homogeneous and are composed of proprietors be JoDgmg to different religions, different castes and different tribes (6).
Both under custom as well as under Hindu Law, a sister is entitled to succeed in preference to the proprietary body (I).
Para 24 of Rattigan' is' Digest only means that sisters and their issues are usually excluded by agnates, however distant, not that a sister is not an heir at all even in the absence of any agnates (2).
When a proprietor governed by the Customary Law of the Punjab dies leaving no sons but a sister, the latter cannot for purposes of inheritance be regarded as the daughter of the penultimate proprietor (3).
Sister's estate, like that of any other female, to ordinarily one for life only. She may, like a daughter under certain circumstances, transmit it to her own son.
*Answer to Question No. 47.-
" 1887.- The replies given state that a sister will succeed in the absence of a daughter or daughter's son. It has already been noticed that a daughter can very rarely succeed, so that the case of a sister is so extremely rare that it may be left out of account. Practically speaking, sisters never succeed and at attestation this was strongly insisted on by Jats, Gujars and Sayyads. All the Jats except those of Jagadhri stated that the land would go to members of the patti, if of the same got, in preference to the sister, and even to members 01 the tribe if there should be none of the same got. This is no is doubt the popular view and in the very rare cases where sisters succeed at all it will generally be found that they hold by consent of the collaterals and under a gift executed by their brother during his life-time. Exceptional cases of this kind have no effect as instances of a custom.
1918- The first sentence of Mr. Kensington's reply is a correct presentment of existing custom."
A. I. R. 1933 Lah. l005- In Rupar Tahsil, sisters inherit in the
= 147 I. C. 712 absence of near collaterals. i.e., fifth degree collaterals.
28 P. R. 1901- jats of village Raipur. Sister was allowed to succeed in the presence of a heterogeneous village body.
**Answer to Question No. 70.-
"The property never devolves upon a sister or her sons. Mosttribes however state that an unmarried daughter of a sonless and widow-less proprietor succeeds to her father's estate till her marriage (Answerto Question 60)."
158 P. L. R. 1912- Telis migrants from Ajnala to Amritsar City. , Sister has got right to share under Mohammedan Law with cousins.
35 P. R. 1909- Dogars. By custom a sister is entitled to succeed to acquired estate to the exclusion of collaterals (6th degree).
* Answer to Question No. 27.-
"It was unanimously stated at last Settlement that sisters can never inherit their brothers' estate. No instances were quoted. This custom is again asserted now but the assertion is not corroborated by the few examples which have come to light.
In spite of the examples however it may be assumed that sisters have no right of succession in the presence of collaterals unless their degree of relationship .be very remote."
A. I. R. 1924 Lah. 265- Khattars. A sister can succeed to the estate left by her brother in preference to the collaterals of her father. With regard to ancestral
=69 I. C. 331 estate the rights of a sister are not superior to those of the collaterals.
** Answer to Question No. 70.-
“No, a sister or her sons cannot inherit, but an unmarried sister must be maintained till marriage.”
166 P.R. 1888- Kanchans of Delhi. Muhammadan Law applied in the absence of custom. Brothers were entitled to 1/4th share each and sisters to 1/8th share each of the property of the deceased.
Dera Ghazi Khan District.
***Answer to Question No. 47-
“Muhammadan tribes that profess to be govered by the Muhammadan Law in matters of inheritance say that siters and their sons inherit as prescribed by that law. Kasranis, Khosas, Gurchanis and the Rajanpur Biloches state that sisters and their sons never succeed. Among Hindus the sister does not inherit nor does her Son. The Jampur Hindus, however, say that in the absence of collaterals of the fourth degree sisters succeed."
C. A. 199 of 1895- Natkanis of Dera Ghazi Khan. Sister succeeds to a share.
Dera Ismail Khan District.
****Answer to Question No. 26, Sec. V-
“ All tribes-
If the deceased leaves no descendants, nor any of the other relations who succeed in their default, then his sisters, whether married or maiden, inherit equally. Failing them their sons take their mother's shares.
Note.- The Hindus of the Kulachi Tahsil state that the sisters or their issue can never inherit to the exclusion of the agnates."
*Answer to Question No. 58.-
"Sisters and their sons never inherit the property."
Note.-The above is correct, in that sisters do not succeed qua sisters. but there are instances of unmarried sisters succeeding in the same way as unmarried daughters till marriage. Of course in the event of the complete absence of other heirs sisters might succeed.
63 I. C. 544- Bodla Jats. Sisters are excluded by collaterals (4th degree) from succession to non-ancestral estate of the last mate holder.
113 P. R. I892- Dhariwal Jats of Fazilka Tahsil. A sister and her son are not preferred to collaterals descended from the grandfather of the deceased to succeed to the acquired estate of the deceased proprietor.
**Answer to Question No. 55.-
" All tribes-
Sisters and their sons are in no case entitled to inherit. Among Tahsil Wazirabad tribes and Arains (Tahsil Sharakpur) in default of collaterals up to fourth degree, the inheritance devolves upon daughters and in their default sister. And their sons inherit the estate.
However, among Cheema Jats a childless proprietor is not competent to make a gift in favour of a sister's son in the presence of collaterals related to the donor in the sixth degree (See Punjab Record Civil No. 135 of 1894)."
A. I. R. 1934 Lah. 761- Dhotar jats of village Vinni in the Hafiza- bad Tahsil. Sisters and their issue are usually excluded from inheritance to ancestral
property by agnates however remote. When the sisters seek to
= 15 Lah. 638 inherit the estate of their deceased brother in
= 148 I. C. 5 f 7 preference to collaterals of the tenth degree the onus is on them to establish a custom in favour of their succession.
***Answer to Question No. 84.-
In the absence of collaterals the sister and sister's son succeed."
A. I. R. 1935 Lah. 812- Muhammadan Gujars of Gujrat District.
-156 I. C. 447 Sisters are excluded from ancestral property by collaterals.
A. I. R. 1934 Lah. 351- Among Jats of Tahsil Kharian, sisters
-15 Lah. 791 are entitled to succeed to the property of
-150 I. C. 46 their deceased brothers which is not ancestral for their life or till their marriage.
20 P. R. 1919- Swaiya Jats. Non-ancestral property. Sister not excluded by collaterals (9th degree).
116 P. R. 1884- Gujars of Kharian Tehsil. Sister not excluded by collaterals (6th and 7th degrees). The Mohammedan Law applied.
18 P. R. 1881- Mohammedans of Mauza Rajoki, Gujrat Tehsil. By Mohammedan Law a sister's Son is excluded from succession to the estate of the deceased by collaterals of the deceased.
*Answer to Question No. 26, Part II
"The answer to question 16 applies mutatis mutandis to this question also."
A. I. R. 1922 Lah. 4O6- Qureshis of Taragarh. Muhammadan Law
=3 Lah. 278 applied. Sister took one-half and the collaterals
= 69 I. C. 1000 (4th degree) took one-half.
A. I. R. 1922 Lah. 222- Qureshis. Muhammadan Law applied.
-3 Lah. 274
**Answer to Question No.1, Part II-Section III. -
“Sisters and their sons are in no case entitled to inherit (All tribes).
Note:- Perhaps, following the analogy of the daughter's case, among the Sheikhs and Sayyads, the sister or sister's son might have a right to inherit in the absence of male descendants through males of the same grandfather; but in no case is the Mohammedan Law of sharer and residuary as regards the sister acted on.
See notes on "daughter." Generally speaking, neither has any right to inherit ; but the consent of the heirs (agnates) to the succession of the daughter or daughter's son is more likely than in that of the sister or sister’s son."
*Answer to Question No. 66.-
Sister and sister's Son are in no case entitled to inherit."
*Answer to Question No. 54.-
“Generally the right of sisters and their sons to succeed is not admitted, but Gujars, Pathans, Sainis and Sheikhs say they succeed in the absence of all collaterals, and Kalals say they can succeed in the absence of daughters and before collaterals of the sixth degree. (See answer to question No. 45 given by Kalals)."
A. I. R. 1934 Lah.- Gujars of Dasuya Tehsil. Sisters are not
554-16 Lah. 4 - recognized as heirs in the presence of collaterals however distant.
1926,96 I. C. 907- Sainis. Self-acquired estate.
-27 P. L. R. 419.
67 P. R. 1915- Kakkazai Sheikhs of Hoshiarpur Town. Self. acquired estate.
55 P. R. 1909- Afghans of village Nasran, Hoshiarpur Tehsil. Ancestral estate. The onus lay on the plaintiff to establish that by custom a sister is entitled to succeed to the ancestral estate of her deceased brother to the exclusion of his male collaterals, (7th degree).
12 P. R. 1882- Jats. Collaterals not excluded by sister's son.
**Answer to Question No. 79 (old question No. 25).
"All tribes.-In the presence of sons sisters do not inherit. In the absence of male lineal descendants, widows, daughters, mother of the deceased and unmarried sisters succeed successively till marriage. Sisters have the rights as unmarried daughters till their marriage as laid down in answer to question No. 39.
In the absence of. collaterals, sisters get their full share and if they die, their sons succeed by representation to their mothers' shares. Among Mohammedans those sisters who have been married to the collaterals of their brothers have prior rights compared with sisters married in different families or castes.
In cases when inheritance could devolve on sisters, in their absence, sisters' son succeed to their mothers' shares. The husband of a sister, however, is not entitled to succeed in any case."
A. I. R. 1940 Lah. 515- Sayyads; married sisters succeed to the property of their deceased in brother if collaterals within
=42 P. L. R. 644- five degrees do not exist. Among the on appeal upheld in married sisters those of them alone are preferred who are married to collaterals within five or six degrees, and all other sisters who are married to collaterals remoter than six degrees or strangers stand on equal ,footing. Unmarried sisters succeed till marriage and their estate is, therefore, limited and not absolute. An unmarried sister in possession of the property cannot alienate the property so as to prejudice the right of a ' married sister.
A. I. R. 1936 Lah. 373- Amongst Nekokara Qureshis of Jhang District, where a sister succeeds to her brother she is succeeded by her sons, but it there are no sons her husband does not succeed. If, however the land in question is the self acquired property of the sister her husband would succeed in the absence of sons.
41 P. R. 1895- Bukhari Sayyads. Sister or a sister's son not entitled to succeed in the presence of a collateral (5th degree).
*Answer to question No. 68.-
A sister can hold until marriage only, if there are no descendant and no brothers. Her son cannot inherit.
Awans of Tallagang, Mairs and Kahuts and Miscellaneous Chakwaltribes (not Kassars)- Sisters and their sons can inherit if there are no daughters and no agnates within the fourth degree. The shares of the latter would be computed according to the number of sisters. (The Awans subsequently stated that a sister can hold only until marriage in which case, of course, her sons could not inherit. -
Sister takes a share according to Muhammadan Law (no instances could be given; the statement is understood to be made in order to prejudice creditors).
All other tribes-
A sister or her sons can never inherit."
A. I. R. 1937 Lah. 321- Sister versus married daughter's son. Sister of deceased original owner inherits her brother's property.
A. I. R. 1924 Lah. 321- Khotis of Chak Hamid, Pind Dadan Khan
71 I. C. 201 Tehsil. Non-ancestral estate. Sisters do not exclude collaterals (8th degree)
A. I. R. 1921 Lah. 180- Jats. Acquired estate. Personal .Law
-2 Lah. 98 applied. The contest was between sister,
-60 I. C. 509 and collaterals (9th degree).
*Answer to Question No. 54.-
"Sisters and their sons never inherit, but Gujjars, Dogars and miscellaneous Mohammedans of the Jullundur Tehsil say that in the absence of collaterals and daughters, sisters and their Sons succeed, and their shares are computed according to the number of sisters, while among Arians and A wanes of the same tehsil the property devolves upon sisters and their sons if the deceased makes the will in writing; the shares being the same as given in deed."
I. L. R. 1 Lah. 433- Mohammedan Rajputs of village Choman.
= 58 I. C. 986 Sister does not exclude collaterals (6th degree).
I. L. R. I Lah. I- Mohammedan Rajputs of Nakodar Tahsil. Self-
-55 I. C. 828 acquired estate. Sister does not exclude collaterals (8th degree).
46 P. R. 1895- Lodhi Pathans. Ancestral estate. By custom grandsons of a sister of the last male owner are not entitled to succeed to the ancestral estate of the deceased owner to the exclusion of his near collaterals.
** Answer to Question No. 59. -
"Where there are no Sons, widows, mothers, counterpales, daughters, ala maliks or others having a preferential right to succeed, sisters are allowed to succeed. Such cases are not many, and there is recognized custom on that account.
A. I. R. 1940 Lah. 33- Brahmans of Palampur Tahsil; governed by custom; a sister is an heir in the absence of collaterals and has locus standi to sue as next reversioner.
A. I. R. 1936 Lah. 660- Under the Customary Law of the Kangra
= 165 I. C. 78 District, sister and sister's son do not succeed the deceased proprietor.
A. I. R. 1931 Lah. 433- Among Girths of Kangra, sisters or sister's
= 3S I. C. 54 sons are excluded from succession.
1921, 4 Lah. L. J. 336- Lamin Rajputs. Held not proved that
=1921 Lah. 176 sisters and their issue have a right of succession in the absence of all male collaterals.
72 P. R. 1907- Thakar Rajputs in Dada Siba Jagir. A sister's grandson is not entitled to succeed to the ancestral estate of his maternal uncle as against the Ala Malik Jagirdar.
59 P. R. 1905- Girths of village Baldher of Tika Bonehr. A sister's son who had rendered services to the deceased owner was preferred to the owners of the Tika.
**Answer, to Qustion No. 47(Tahsil Kaithal and Parganah Indri)
“The Rajputs of Indri stated that sisters or sister sons could only inherit if no male descendant of the deceased’s ancestor, who settled with the founders of the village, was in existence. Jats and Rors of Indri said they were excluded. The Thula or Patti would take the land, and the sister’s descendants the moveable property. Rajputs and Jats of Kaithal, while denying their right to inherit, said that the owner could give them a share of his property by gift in his life-time. They gave examples of such gifts.
Gujars, Rors and Rains of Kaithal stated that they could not inherit.
Under No. 48 however the Rains have mentioned an example of a sister the inheriting the land of her childless brother.
Too much stress must not be laid on instances of gifts made during life-time. The fact that a few such gifts have remained undisputed does not prove that they could properly be upheld, if objected to by male collaterals."
A. I. R. 1950 East Punjab 289- Jats of Thanesar Tahsil, sisters
-52 P. L. R. 261 succeeds in preference to collaterals of remoter degree than fifth in the absence of daughter or daughter's son. If there be no rule of custom proved in any particular case of succession arising in the Punjab, the rule applicable under the Hindu law as prevails in the State at the moment would apply. Under the Hindu law as now prevailing, sisters are preferential heirs to remote collaterals.
A. I. R. 1937 Lah. 701- Jats of Thanesar Tahsil. Where there are
-171 I. C. 959 no collaterals of the fifth degree or less, a daughter or daughter's son succeeds in preference to collaterals. of a more remote degree and sister or sister son succeeds in preference to collaterals of a remoter degree than the fifth in the absence of a daughter or daughter's son.
*Answer to Question No. 71.-
"The rights of sisters and their descendants are similar to those of daughters as defined in answers to questions Nos. 61 and 65 (See page 440).
Arians of Faizpur Kalan-Sister excludes male cousins (C. R. 2562 of 1911).
Arians-Sisters of a childless proprietor exclude a collateral in the inheritance of ancestral property (C. R. 2367 of 1909).
But among Arians of M. Bhogiwal collaterals exclude the sister, aunt, great-aunt and their children. (C. A. 1178 of 1910)."
A. I. R. 1935 Lah. 532- Arians of Chunian Tahsil. Sister of the
155 I. C. 841 last male holder is. a preferential heir to collaterals of the third degree.
A. I. R. 1930 Lah. 255- Khokhar Rajputs. According to the
=11 Lah. 298 Customary Law of Lahore District the
=122 I. C. 722 sisters have the same rights as daughters and are entitled to inherit the self- acquired property of the deceased. A sister, therefore, is preferential heir as against collateral heir in the 7th degree with regard to the self-acquired property of her brother.
A. I. R. 1928 Lah. 870- Arians of Mauza Sane Kalan. A sister
= 112 I. C. 840 excludes the uncle in succession to the ancestral estate left by her childless brother.
13 I. C. 711- Jats of Mauza Bhadal. In the presence of a
= 122 P. L. R. 1912 collateral a sister no right to succeed to ancestral or non-ancestral estate of her brother.
51 P. L. R. 1904- Lodhi Pathans of: Lahore City. In matters of succession the parties are governed by Mohammedan Law.
174 P. 'R. 1889 - Ghelan Arians. Sister succeeds in preference to cousins of the deceased proprietor.
180 P. R. 1888- Balli Arians. Niece excluded by sister.
25 P. R. 1882- Bhatti Arians. Sisters not excluded by brother's son.
*Answer to Question No. 52.-
"Sisters and their sons do not succeed in the presence of any collaterals who can prove their relationship to the deceased. Instances of sisters or their sons succeeding are very rare."
A. I. R. 1938 Lah. 849- Jats of village Dho1ewal in Tahsil Ludhiana. Sisters and their sons do not succeed even in the absence of collaterals to the self-acquired as well as ancestral property.
28 P. R. 1917- Mohammedan Rajputs, Ludhiana Tehsil. In the absence of a custom to the contrary the father's sister's son had a preferential right of succession to the village proprietary body.
29 P R 1911- Garewal Jats. Ancestral property. Sisters and sister's daughters are excluded by collaterals (3rd degree).
163 P. R. 1882- Chunda Jats of Jagraon Tehsil. Land given by a brother to his sister, who had been abandoned by her husband for her maintenance and also for her sons. Sister's son dying without direct lineal heirs. Land did not revert to the heirs of the donor but went to the sister's husband.
A. I. R. 1923 Lah. 476- Prima facie agnates of a deceased person
=4 Lah. 392 are entitled to a share in his estate even
= 73 I. C. 786 though they alive in another village and own no land in the village in which the land in dispute is situated. The onus lies on the sisters to establish that they have better claim to succeed to the property in dispute than the uncle or cousins.
Answer to question No. 26, Section V. -
"The property of evolves upon sisters in the cases referred to in Answer No. 21 of this chapter. When the property devolves upon sisters, it is inherited by their sons after them, or at the time, if they are not alive. The shares are computed in proportion to the number of
23 P. R. 1913- Pathans of Mauza Ballu Khel, Mianwali Tahsil.
-19 I. C. 750 By custom a mother and a step-mother succeed to the estate of a male proprietor to the exclusion of his sisters.
Montgomery District. .
** Answer to Question No. 77-(Pakpattan and Dipalpur Tahsils).
"(1) All tribes, both Tahsils-Sisters get no share.
(2) Wattu Rajputs, Mogals, Pathans, Qureshis and Chishtis of Dipalpur state that each sitter takes a share equal to the share of an unmarried daughter."
*Answer to Question No. 77.-
“Excepting the tribes who follow Hindu or Muhammadan Law the replies are as follows :
All tribes of Shujabad and Lodhran, Hindus or Maini and all tribes o Multan (except Khatis, Aroras and Brahmans), and Muhammadan of Kabirwala, way that siters succeed in the absence of sons, daughters, widows, daughters’ sons and collaterals within four generations. Sisters’ sons succeed by representations to their mothers’ shares.
Muhammadans of Maiki say that daughters but not daughters' sons are preferred to sisters and that daughters’ sons are preferred to siters’ sons..
Brahmans, except Pushkarna Brahmans, Khatris and Aroras of Multan city, follow Hindu Law while the answer of rural members of these tribes is as 1n the answer to Question 35.
Note.-The courts have hitherto followed Muhammadan Law, in regard to the Kalru tribes of the Multan Tahsil-vide Ruling 13 of 1919.
117 P. R. 1901- Channar Jats of Lodhran Tahsil. Muhammadan
-182 P. L. R. 1901 Law followed. The collaterals failed to establish that they were entitled to succeed to immoveable estate to the exclusion of sister of the deceased.