| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 1415 2016 SLD 1415 2016 MLD 258 |
Balochistan High Court
C.P. No. 677 of 2010, decided on 5th October, 2015. Date of hearing: 25th August, 2015.
MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI AND, JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL, JUSTICE
Sohail Ahmed Ansari for Petitioner. Mst. Sarwat Hina, Additional, P.G. for Official
Respondents.
C.P. No. 677 of 2010, decided on 5th October, 2015. Date of hearing: 25th August, 2015.
MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI AND, JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL, JUSTICE
Sohail Ahmed Ansari for Petitioner. Mst. Sarwat Hina, Additional, P.G. for Official
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD ALI KHAN PARACHA - er
VS
Mst. BINISH and 2 OTHERS --Respondent
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 5, Schedule
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Limitation Act, 1908
Section: 103
West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) --------- ----------S.5, Sched. --------- -Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 103 --------- Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199 --------- Constitutional petition --------- Suit for recovery of prompt dower --------- Limitation, determination of --------- Both Trial Court and appellate court decreed the suit allowing recovery of dower amount and maintenance --------- Defendant contended that suit for recovery of dower amount was barred under Art. 103 of Limitation Act, 1908, as the same had been filed after six years of divorce --------- Validity --------- Neither any ground of limitation was raised in written statement, nor was issue framed by Trial Court in that respect --------- Limitation pursuant to Art. 103 of Limitation Act, 1908 would start from date of refusal to pay dower amount --------- Mere making of demand of dower amount without any refusal by husband did not attract provision of Art. 103 of Limitation Act, 1908 --------- Limitation would not start unless two conditions, making of demand and refusal by husband, were fulfilled --------- Defendant, in his written statement, had pleaded that he had paid dower amount to plaintiff, but he failed to substantiate the same through evidence --------- Defendant's witnesses, during cross-examination, had admitted that dower amount had not been paid to plaintiff --------- Limitation, in the present case, would, therefore, start from time when written statement had been filed by defendant --------- Present suit was not hit by Art. 103 of Limitation Act, 1908 --------- Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI, JUSTICE:---------- The respondent No. 1 filed a suit for Dower Amount (Haq Maher), Dowry Articles, Maintenance against the petitioner before the Family Judge-II, Quetta (hereinafter the "trial Court") with the averments that the marriage between the spouses was solemnized on 5th November 1998, whereby Rs.500,000/- was fixed as Haq-Maher payable on demand, which has not been paid by the petitioner. Out of the wedlock, a baby child namely Laiba Ali was born on 13th August 2000 and the birth expenses…
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