Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5, Schedule

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.XII,R.6

(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5, Sched.---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XII, R. 6---Suit for recovery of dower---Judgment on admission---Family Court dismissed the suit for recovery/possession of house in lieu of dower to be paid by husband in terms of Column No. 16 of Nikahnama---Plea of wife was that an agreement was executed by husband in her favour relating to transfer of house as dower--- Husband claimed that the said dower was paid in cash---Trial Court dismissed the suit on the admission of wife that dower had been received by her---Validity---Trial Court had not mentioned in what perspective such admission was made and what was the mode of payment of dower to the wife in terms of her admission---Admission of wife had been considered in piecemeal before using the same for decision---Admission had to be rejected or accepted as a whole which had not been done by the courts below---Constitutional petition was partly allowed and the matter was remanded to the Trial Court for decision afresh. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XII, R. 6---Judgment on admission---Scope---Admission is to be accepted or rejected as a whole. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: MUZAMIL AKHTAR SHABIR, J.---- Through instant constitutional petition, the petitioner has called in question the judgment dated 01.07.2016, passed by Judge Family Court, Rahim Yar Khan whereby the said court has dismissed the suit of the petitioner for recovery/possession of House No.52-D, Street No.5, Block-Y, Gulshan-e-Usman, District Rahim Yar Khan ("House") in lieu of dower agreed to be paid by respondent No.3 in terms of Column No.16 of the Nikahnama entered between the parties on 07.07.1991 and has also called in question the consolidated judgment dated 15.12.2016 passed by learned Addl: District Judge, Rahim Yar Khan whereby the afore referred decision of the Judge Family Court, Rahim Yar Khan was upheld by dismissing the appeals filed by both the parties to the extent of House. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner had produced in evidence an agreement (Tamleeknama)(Exh-P1), executed by respondent No.3 in favour of the petitioner relating to…

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