| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 935 2017 SLD 935 2017 PLJ 101 |
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 38067 of 2016, decided on 8.12.2016. Date of hearing: 8.12.2016.
TARIQ IFTIKHAR AHMAD, JUSTICE
Mr. Sami-ul-Hassan Rana, Advocate for Petitioner.
W.P. No. 38067 of 2016, decided on 8.12.2016. Date of hearing: 8.12.2016.
TARIQ IFTIKHAR AHMAD, JUSTICE
Mr. Sami-ul-Hassan Rana, Advocate for Petitioner.
FATIMA RANA
VS
BILAL AHMAD BHATTI, ETC. --RespondentS
Law:
Section:
Family Courts Act, 1964 (XXXV of 1964)-- ----Preamble--Family Courts were established under the Act for expeditious settlement and disposal of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and for matter connected therewith. Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--Family Courts Act, (XXXV of 1964), Schedule No. 9--Jurisdiction of Family Court--Divergent pleadings--Personal property and belongings of wife--Petitioner earned herself amount while serving in Canada and amount was sent through western union to her husband was dispute relating to marriage or matters--Question of-Whether disputed amount was personal property as wife--Determination--Prima-facie the claim of petitioner is of civil nature, for recovery of amount received by husband from her--Procedure to secure civil right is to be dealt with under CPC by Court of competent jurisdiction, whereas, family laws being special law has its own procedure as well as fixation of time for disposal of same--Courts act are deriving jurisdiction from codified law and also on basis of principles of natural justice--Trial Court while acting under principle of equity, natural justice and good conscious correctly observed and 'advise' to petitioner to avail her remedy at proper forum against her claim for recovery of amount--Petition was dismissed. PLD 2011 SC 260, rel. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: TARIQ IFTIKHAR AHMAD, JUSTICE:---.--- Petitioner filed a family suit against Respondent No. 1 Bilal Ahmed Bhatti on 12.03.2016 for dissolution of marriage, recovery of maintenance allowance, dowry articles and cash approximately Rs. 64,65,871/-. 2. According to Para 5 of the plaint, she contended that after her marriage with respondent, she started job in Canada and out of her salary received, she sent total amount Rs. 40,00,000/- from time to time to respondent through Western Union. Respondent No. 1 filed written statement. He simply denied receipt of any amount from the petitioner allegedly sent to him by her from Canada. 3. Learned trial Court on the basis of divergent pleadings of the parties formulated five issues. The relevant Issue No. 3 is reproduced here under: Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get recovered…
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