Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 14(1), 14(3)

Law: Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939

Section: 2(ix)(c)

REMARKS

Held: (i) Section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act,1964 governs appeals from decisions and decrees of Family Courts. Subsection (1) allows an appeal against a decision or decree passed by a Family Court, whereas, subsection (3) expressly bars an appeal or revision against an interim order. The superior courts have consistently held that the words \"decision\" and \"decree\" as used in Section 14(1) are to be read ejusdem generis, and only such decisions are appealable which finally determine the substantive rights of the parties.
(ii) In the instant case, the impugned order passed by the Family Court did not finally adjudicate upon any substantive right of the parties. It merely declined to summarily dismiss the suit at a preliminary stage and directed that the case be decided on merits after recording of evidence. The petitioner was not deprived of his right to produce evidence to prove his potency. Therefore, the order was interlocutory in nature and as such, not appealable in view of Section 14(3) of the Act. It is settled law that where the statute excludes a remedy of appeal or revision against an interlocutory order, the said order cannot be challenged through a writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution.
(iii) ln the present case, the petitioner has an adequate and efficacious remedy of challenging the final decision of the Family Court, if aggrieved, after conclusion of the trial. Entertaining an appeal or constitutional petition at such premature stage would circumvent the express bar under Section 14(3) of the Act undermining the objective of expeditious trial.
(iv) For the foregoing reasons, it is held that the order dated 21.11.2024 passed by the Family Court was interlocutory in nature, as it did not finally determine any substantive rights of the parties, but merely regulated the manner in which a fact related to the potency of the petitioner was to be proved during trial. In terms of subsection (3) of Section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act,1964, no appeal or revision lies against such an interlocutory order. Therefore, the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the Appellate Court was incompetent, and the judgment dated 24.02.2025 passed thereon was without jurisdiction and coram non judice. It may not be out of context to mention that once this Court notices that a judgment has been passed by a subordinate court, which, though not independently challenged before this Court, suffers from an inherent lack of jurisdiction, it cannot turn a blind eye to such legal infirmity. A judgment rendered by a forum lacking jurisdiction is a nullity in the eyes of law and of no legal consequence. It is for this reason that the appellate judgment dated 24.02.2025 is declared to have been passed without lawful authority and is of no legal effect.

 Summary:Impotency Petition