Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 681 2012 SLD 681 2012 CLC 1881
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.9938 of 2012, decision dated: 19-04-2002
NASIR SAEED SHEIKH, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

SHAMIM ARA

VS

BAKHTAWAR GUL and 2 others

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 17

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 17

(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------S. 17---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Preamble---Application for review/recall of order passed by Family Court---Maintainability---Provision of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 nowhere provided for review or recall of order passed by the Family Court---Application for recall of order passed by the Family Court was not legally competent---Provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 had been specifically excluded from application to the proceedings under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. (b) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S.5 & Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance of minors was decreed concurrently---Enforcement of decree---Petitioner, the paternal grandmother of the minor, had stood surety for the -debtor (her son) and contended that the said surety was limited to the amount which was due at the time of furnishing surety bond by her and that she should be released from any further liability---Validity---Petitioner had not produced all the orders referred to by the Appellate Court and that in order to save the skin of her son and for denying recovery of maintenance allowance in favour of the minor had sought recourse to different applications and proceedings which were repeatedly rejected by the courts bellow---Petitioner, without producing a copy of the and decree passed in the matter by the Family Court, had sought the setting aside of the orders of the courts blow---Petitioner had not come to the court with clean hands---Surety bond executed by the petitioner was without any restrictions and covered the entire decretal amount recoverable from her son/ -debtor Constitutional petition was dismissed. Shaw Wallace & Co. v. Sundar Singh AIR 1930 Lah. 575 and Jayappa Lokappa Narsinganawar v. Shivangouda Dyamangouda Patil AIR 1928 Bombay 42 distinguished. Ch. Abdul Majeed for Petitioner. ORDER NASIR SAEED SHEIKH, J.--- The petitioner Mst. Shamim Ara is the mother of Muhammad Farooq who was married with one Mst. Najma Gul and during the wedlock the respondent No.1 daughter was born…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492