This work analyzes one of the hottest and most tricky issues of the Muslim Family Law, i.e., whether in cases of divorce (ṭalāq), three repudiations spoken in one session equal one or three repudiations. There had been no disagreement regarding this issue among the four Sunni Schools of Jurisprudence until the end of the 7th century Hijrah when Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn al-Qayim challenged the position of the ğamhūr (majority of Islamic scholars). Before them only the Shīʿa and the Ẓāhirites had treated three pronouncements in one session as one. The ğamhūr has given very strong arguments in support of their point of view, whereas Ibn Taimiyah and Ibn al-Qayim have advanced very weak arguments in support of their view. The Shīʿa Imāmiyah School of Thought holds two opinions. According to one view, three ṭalāqs in one session amount to one, while the second point of view holds that three repudiations in one session do not amount to any ṭalāq.
The issue of the share of a grandchild under section 4 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 has been hotly debated since its inception. The article ignites the old debate mainly to re-evaluate the arguments of its (non)-Islamicity according to orthodox Islamic law as well as the Federal Shariat Court and to critically analyse the (mis)interpretations of this section by the different High Courts and the Supreme Court of Pakistan over the past several decades. The major findings are that the vast majority of Muslim (as well as some non-Muslim) scholars consider representational succession as a re-writing of the Islamic law of inheritance; that interpretation of section 4 by the superior courts in Pakistan amounts to the situation as if the Ordinance had not been enacted; that experts in this field prefer ‘obligatory bequest’ over representational succession but the option of bequest has too many hidden problems. By arguing that obligatory bequest is not a good alternative to representational succession, the article recommends that the state should fulfill its responsibility of taking care of orphaned grandchildren in the society and such a sensitive responsibility should not be shifted to individuals through legislative or judicial maneuvering.