FCC Issues New Guidelines to Protect Minors’ Property and Inheritance Rights

The Federal Constitutional Court has issued key guidelines for civil and revenue courts handling cases involving the property and inheritance rights of minors.

In a 20-page judgment, Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan said courts must first determine whether any party is a minor before taking any substantive step in a case.

He ruled that judges must strictly follow Order XXXII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in all suits filed by or against minors.

The court said these safeguards must be treated as guiding principles in all proceedings affecting minors’ rights and property. It overturned a Dec. 11, 2024, judgment of the Lahore High Court’s Bahawalpur Bench and restored the revisional court’s earlier order.

The case involved a property dispute in Bahawalnagar and questioned whether legal protections for minors were properly observed when a compromise decree was recorded.

Widow Bushra Bibi had challenged the decree under Section 12(2) of the CPC, arguing that some parties to the compromise were minors and their interests were not protected.

The revisional court had already annulled the compromise decree and sent the case back for a fresh trial. However, the Lahore High Court later set aside that decision, prompting an appeal before the Federal Constitutional Court.

The FCC ruled that courts must appoint a guardian for a minor only after confirming that the proposed guardian has no conflict of interest.

It also said no compromise affecting a minor’s rights or property can be accepted unless the court records that it is lawful, in the minor’s best interests, and compliant with Order XXXII, Rule 7.

The court added that where a compromise affects a minor’s property or inheritance rights, judges must also ensure compliance with the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and seek prior approval from the competent guardian court where required.

The FCC warned that courts must not decide such matters hastily and must independently assess the best interests of the minor in every order.

“A judicial decree cannot breathe legal life into an agreement which the law itself regards as vitiated,” the court observed.

The bench said the Lahore High Court failed to properly apply the legal framework protecting the inheritance and property rights of women and minors. It therefore held that the High Court’s interference with the revisional court’s judgment could not stand.