| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 196 2023 SLD 196 2023 CLC 244 |
Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench
Writ Petition No.1259-A of 2019, decided on 25th April, 2022. Date of hearing: 25th April, 2022.
KAMRAN HAYAT MIANKHEL, J
Hafiq Bakhtiar Ahmad Awan for Petitioner. Ms. Uzma Munawar for
Respondent.
Writ Petition No.1259-A of 2019, decided on 25th April, 2022. Date of hearing: 25th April, 2022.
KAMRAN HAYAT MIANKHEL, J
Hafiq Bakhtiar Ahmad Awan for Petitioner. Ms. Uzma Munawar for
Respondent.
Mst. SAFINA NOOR
VS
MUHAMMAD AYUB and 2 others
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 5
(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-----S.5, Sched.--- Dower---Burden to prove---Photo copy of Nikahnama---Wife filed suit for recovery of dowered property, gold ornaments, past maintenance for herself and minor daughter and recovery of dowry articles before the Family Court---Husband appeared and filed written statement and also prayed for restitution of conjugal rights ---Family Court decreed the suit of wife---Appellate Court partially allowed both appeals filed by wife and husband against decree of Family Court---Validity----Wifes claim was that her marriage with the husband was solemnized and her dower was fixed as 04 tolas gold ornaments, 10 marlas plot and a constructed house by husband---Wife failed to produce original Nikahnama---Wife neither produced Nikah Khawan nor Nikah Registrar nor any witness of the Nikahnama to substantiate her claim---Copy of Nikahnama was never exhibited but was marked, because it was a photocopy---Witnesses produced by the wife after recording their examination-in-chief had absented themselves and were never cross-examined, due to that reason their evidence could not be looked into---Wife never applied to produce secondary evidence in order to prove Nikahnama----Husband in his cross-examination stated that 04 tolas gold ornaments were fixed as dower and the same had been paid to wife and he also admitted that one house was also given to wife for residence---Husband stated that house was meant for residence purposes---Further in cross-examination he had stated that he was ready to take his wife along with him as he loved her very much---Wife had proved the dower in shape of house whereas failed to prove through evidence about dower in shape of 10 marals---Constitutional petition was dismissed. (b) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-----S.5, Sched.---Snatching of gold----Burden to prove---Refusal to take special oath---Payment of 04 tolas gold ornaments of dower had not been disputed---Petitioner(wife) appeared as witness and also in her plaint admitted the delivery of gold ornaments which she wore at the time of her marriage but failed to prove the snatching of the same---In her cross-examination she refused to accept the…
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