Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5, ScheduleS.14,14(3),17-B

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972

Section: 3,3(2)

(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5, Sched. & S.17-B---Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972), S.3---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Intra Court appeal---Maintainability---Suit for jactitation of marriage, maintenance, dower and dowry articles---Trial Court dismissed defendant's application for recording his statement through commission---Defendant challenged order of Trial Court through constitutional petition---Single Judge, High Court upheld the order of the Trial Court holding that recording of statement through commission would leave the relevant questions unanswered as the plaintiff had challenged defendant's physical capacity to pronounce `talaq'---Single Judge, High Court, however, observed that the defendant could record his statement by appointing attorney---Validity---Embargo placed by S.3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 would operate where application/petition filed under Art.199 of the Constitution arose out of the proceedings wherein law provided for at least one appeal, one revision or one review to any court, Tribunal or authority against the original order---Section 14(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 barred appeal against an interim order passed by Family Court---Impugned order which was passed under S.17-B of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 was an interim order which was neither appealable nor revisable under S.14(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Embargo of S.3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 was not applicable to the case----Purpose of embargo placed under S.3(2) of the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972 was to curtail the number of legal remedies available to a litigant so that the cases may reach termination point---Where original order was appealable or revisable and the same had been challenged in constitutional petition, intra court appeal was not maintainable against such order---Order in question was neither appealable, nor revisable, nor reviewable---Exemption from appearing in person for recording one's statement was meant to avoid ,delay in adjudication which might occur in procuring personal attendance---Personal attendance of the defendant was…

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