A Muslim expectant heir can relinquish his future right of inheritance to the property of his father under a family arrangement. Such an arrangement is binding on the expectant heir and operates as an equitable estoppel against him from claiming a share in the property after the death of the father.

( 1 ) THE plaintiff-appellant sued his brothers sisters and widowed mother for partition of the suit property and for getting his share in those properties. He also claimed relief for taking accounts and getting mesne profits. The suit having been dismissed he is in appeal before this Court. The appellant and respondents Nos. 1 to 11 are the sons and the daughters of deceased Meman Haji Abdul Sakur Haji Isa who died on October 5 1968 On September 16 1971 the appellant filed the present suit for the reliefs as stated above.

( 2 ) THE contesting respondents opposed the suit inter alia on the ground that the plaintiff-appellant had under a family settlement dated June 10 1968 in consideration of getting certain other properties relinuished his interest and share in the suit property and therefore he is now not entitled to file the suit. That contention has weighed with the learned Judge who ultimately dismissed the suit.

( 3 ) ON behalf of the appellant his learned Advocate strenuously contended that the Muslim Law does not know any concept of family arrangement or family settlement and a person governed by the Muslim Law cannot relinquish his future right of inheritance to the property of his father. The family arrangement relied upon by the contesting respondents was also challenged on the ground that the document envisaging the family arrangement is not registered under the Indian Registration Act.

( 4 ) THE learned Judge of the Court below has succinctly dealt with both these twin grounds raised on behalf of the appellant for challenging the family settlement or family arrangement advanced by the contesting respondents to meet the appellants suit. The learned Judge has strongly relied upon the decision in the case of Gulam Abbas vs. Haji Kayam Ali and Ors. AIR 1973 Supreme Court Page 554. I think the learned Judge was perfectly right in saying that the facts of the present case are on all fours with the facts of the aforesaid Supreme Court judgment and his decree dismissing the suit is in my opinion unexecptionable.

( 5 ) THE family arrangement relied upon by the contesting respondents is to be found at Exh. 79 on the record of the case. The deceased father of the plaintiff-appellant as also the appellant and his other brothers are parties to that family arrangement. Jubedabai respondent No. 4 is also a signatory to that family arrangement. Under that family arrangement made during the life-time of the father of the appellant certain properties of the father of the appellant came to be given to the appellant while certain other properties came to be given to the other brothers of the appellant. In order to adjust equities it was also provided in the family arrangement that as the land which was given to the appellant was more as compared to the land given to his other two brothers the appellant should pay Rs. 4000/- to Jubedabai his sister respondent No. 4 herein towards her share in the property of her father on the death of her other. The family arrangement also recited that as the father during his life lime was giving away certain of his properties to his three sons and the daughter by his first wife those three sons and the daughter of the father by his first wife would henceforth have no share in the ether properties of the father and that those three sons and the daughter agreed to that arrangement and undertook to abide by that arrangement. It was further recited that those three sons and the daughter of the father by his first wife would not lay any claim to the properties of the father on the fathers death. However if any of those three sons and the daughter of the father by his first wife laid any such claim then he/she would have to bring into common hotchpotch the properties given to him/her under the family arrangement together with the mesne profits etc. and only then would he/she be entitled to lay claim to his/her share in the properties left behind by the father on the death of the father.

( 6