Co-heir cannot sell inherited property to settle deceased's debts without consent of other heirs.

The court ruled that a co-heir of a deceased Muhammadan cannot unilaterally sell property to settle the deceased's debts, as such a sale does not bind other co-heirs or creditors. Inheritance is distributed based on shares, with debts and funeral expenses taking precedence. The judgment emphasizes that each heir is entitled to income proportionate to their share and cannot act on behalf of others without consent. Voluntary alienations by one heir do not affect other heirs, who can only deal with their individual interest in inherited property.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Muhammadan law regarding the sale of property by one co-heir to discharge debts of the deceased.
2. Validity and extent of such a sale on other co-heirs or creditors of the deceased.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the question of whether a co-heir of a deceased Muhammadan, in possession of the estate, can sell property to pay off the deceased's debts. The court rules that such a sale is not binding on other co-heirs or creditors. The inheritance vests in heirs according to their shares, with funeral expenses and debts taking precedence over distribution among heirs.

2. Muhammadan jurisprudence views a deceased person's rights in properties as continuing after death to meet funeral expenses, debts, and bequests. The devolution of the estate to heirs occurs immediately, with each heir entitled to income proportionate to their share. The court emphasizes that one heir cannot deal with the shares of other heirs, as per the principles of Muhammadan law.

3. The judgment delves into the concept of Shirhat in Muhammadan law, where joint ownership is akin to a partnership. It clarifies that one heir cannot act on behalf of other co-heirs without their consent. The court cites authoritative texts to establish that representation in suits does not grant a single heir the authority to bind the shares of other heirs.

4. Various rulings from different High Courts are discussed, highlighting differing interpretations on whether a decree against one heir binds others. The judgment concludes that voluntary alienations by one heir do not bind other heirs under Muhammadan law. Each heir can only deal with their individual interest in the inherited property.

5. The judges concur that a co-heir cannot represent others and administer the deceased's estate without specific legal authority. The judgment clarifies that a sale by one heir for debt repayment typically only conveys that individual's share of the property. Representation in a suit may differ from the general rule regarding individual dealings with inherited property.

---