Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 910 2016 SLD 910 2016 CLC 256
Peshawar High Court
W.P. No. 86-H of 2015, decided on 6th February, 2015. Date of hearing: 6th February, 2015;
ABDUL LATIF KHAN AND MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, JJ
Sajjad Ahmed Abbasi for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents.

SHER DIL KHAN

VS

Baby MAIMOONA and others

Law:

Section:

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5, Sched---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art.181---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss.47 & 48--- Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance---Execution petition--- Limitation--- Objection application--- Scope---Contention of applicant- debtor was that execution petition was time barred---Objection petition was dismissed concurrently---Validity---First application for execution of decree was to be governed by residuary Art.181 of Limitation Act, 1908---Rest of application made thereafter would be governed by S.48, C.P.C. whereby six years period of limitation had been provided---First execution petition was not pressed due to compromise and second application was moved---Second execution petition was filed within limitation period of six years prescribed by law---Both the courts below had rightly turned down objection petition for rejection of execution application filed by both the applicant- debtor---No illegality or material irregularity had been pointed out in the impugned s passed by the courts below---Constitutional petition being devoid of force was dismissed in limine. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S. 48---Execution petition---Limitation---Period of limitation for execution petition under S.48, C.P.C. was six years from the passing of order on the earlier execution application. JUDGMENT MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, J.--- Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has impugned the judgment dated 27.11.2014 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-VII, Abbottabad, and the judgment dated 05.05.2014 passed by the learned Executing Court / Judge Family Court, Abbottabad. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the respondent filed a suit for dissolution of marriage, monthly allowed for herself and for the minor etc. During trial both the parties appeared before the Court and submitted that through a private compromise the matter has been patched-up and case be decided in terms of compromise. In the light of statement of the parties the suit was disposed of through judgment dated…
🔒
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