| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2021 SLG 457 2021 SLD 457 2021 PLJ 25 |
Peshawar High Court
W.P. No. 847-M of 2019 with Interim Relief (N) decided on 22.9.2020, Date of hearing: 22.9.2020.
ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM AND WIQAR AHMAD, J, JUSTICE
Mr. Aziz-ur-Rahman Swati, Advocate for Petitioner. Miss Mehnaz Naz, Advocate for
Respondent No. 1.
W.P. No. 847-M of 2019 with Interim Relief (N) decided on 22.9.2020, Date of hearing: 22.9.2020.
ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM AND WIQAR AHMAD, J, JUSTICE
Mr. Aziz-ur-Rahman Swati, Advocate for Petitioner. Miss Mehnaz Naz, Advocate for
Respondent No. 1.
KHAIR-UDDIN
VS
MST. SABIHA AND OTHERS
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 7
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973-- ----Art. 199--West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, S. 7--Suit for dissolution of marriage, recovery of maintenance allowance and recovery of dower and dowry articles--Decreed--Appeal--Dismissed--Minor modification in of appellate Court--Suit for conjugal rights was also decreed--Challenge to--When Judge Family Court has dissolved marriage between spouses vide impugned dated 20.4.2019, on basis of Khula, same cannot be termed as illegal or inappropriate in circumstances of the case--Factual aspect of case is concerned, of Judge Family Court was found to have been justified on basis of material on record existing before Court--High Court is not supposed to reappraise entire evidence--Grant of a decree for restitution of conjugal rights cannot preclude a wife from seeking dissolution of marriage thereafter--It has rightly been held by Judge Family Court that it was a recurring cause of action and so long as wedlock subsists, a suit may be brought for dissolution of marriage, unless such a relief is declined to a wife by a competent Court of law, after hearing a duly instituted suit on merits and when situation remains unchanged--Changed situation had required re-determination for such relief as in earlier suit, grant of maintenance allowance had been made conditional upon compliance of Respondent No. 1 with decree for restitution of conjugal rights, which compliance had become unlawful due to dissolution of marriage--Maintenance granted in family suit had been granted for unspecified period of time, while in subsequent suit, maintenance for Respondent No. 1 had been restricted till passage of period of iddat, which modification had also become necessary in circumstances of case--When marriage has remained effective for a long period of eight years, justification for return of amount of dower already paid to wife, did not exist--When justification for its return had not been exiting, and impugned order of Judge Family Court is correct in its outcome, then non-discussion on issue of return of dower would not render it liable to be reversed, in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court--Court below has exercised its jurisdiction,…
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