| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 828 2026 SLD 828 = 2026 LHC 1286 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 836 of 2026
Presented By: (MUZAMIL AKHTAR SHABIR) JUDGE
22.01.2026. Mr. Nafees Ahmad Ansari, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Musleh ud Din Khan and Malik Muhammad Bakhsh Khaki, Assistant Advocates General Punjab, Muhammad Azhar Khan Mughal, Ahmad Hassan Khan Khichi and Dr. Muhammad Azeem Raja, Advocates. Rana Ghulam Hussain, Assistant Attorney General for Pakistan.
Writ Petition No. 836 of 2026
Presented By: (MUZAMIL AKHTAR SHABIR) JUDGE
22.01.2026. Mr. Nafees Ahmad Ansari, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Musleh ud Din Khan and Malik Muhammad Bakhsh Khaki, Assistant Advocates General Punjab, Muhammad Azhar Khan Mughal, Ahmad Hassan Khan Khichi and Dr. Muhammad Azeem Raja, Advocates. Rana Ghulam Hussain, Assistant Attorney General for Pakistan.
Muhammad Ahmad Tariq
VS
Judge Family Court, D.G. Khan etc
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 7
Summary
The petitioner challenged the dismissal of his application seeking rejection of the plaint (to the extent of dowry articles) in a composite family suit on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction under Rule 6 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Rules, 1965.
The Court held that:
- Although dowry claims alone must be filed where cause of action arises or where parties resided together,
- The law permits composite family suits under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1964, allowing multiple matrimonial reliefs (maintenance, dower, dowry, etc.) to be joined.
- The proviso to Section 7 is enabling, not restrictive, and does not require dissolution of marriage as a precondition for combining claims.
- Once a suit is validly filed (e.g., where wife resides for dower/maintenance), other connected reliefs (including dowry) can also be joined.
- Piecemeal rejection of plaint is not permissible under law.
Accordingly, the Court found no illegality in the trial court’s order and dismissed the petition.