| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 1506 1994 SLD 1506 = 1995 PLD 46 |
Sindh High Court
Constitution Petitions. Nos.246 and 247 of 1990, heard on 28th June, 1993.
Presented By: Before Ahmed Yar Khan, J
Maqbool Ahmed Awan for Petitioner. Abdul Naeem for
Respondent.
Constitution Petitions. Nos.246 and 247 of 1990, heard on 28th June, 1993.
Presented By: Before Ahmed Yar Khan, J
Maqbool Ahmed Awan for Petitioner. Abdul Naeem for
Respondent.
Mst. NIGHAT AIJAZ---Petitioner
VERSUS
MUHAMMAD JAMEEL---Respondent
Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 5 , 23
West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-- ----Ss.5, 23 & Sched: -Suit for jactitation of marriage---Bar of jurisdiction of Family . Court---Effect---Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon a suit filed for jactitation of marriage---Provision of S.23, West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, has placed embargo on the jurisdiction of Family Courts only in cases where there .was no dispute about the existence of marriage and marriage was otherwise assumed to be valid---Section 23, West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, was, thus, not applicable in those cases where marriage was challenged on the basis of fraud, forgery, misrepresentation etc. and suit for jactitation of marriage was filed by either party in Family Court. West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)- ----S.5 & Sched: --Suit for jactitation of marriage and for restitution of conjugal rights---Proof---Alleged marriage, if any, was apparently performed against the wishes of parents of alleged wife (petitioner)---Respondent's attempt to prove Nikah by alleged Nikah Khawan failed to bear fruit for the (Nikah Khawan) admitted that the female present in Court was not the same female who had signed affidavit in his presence---Trial Court had observed that alleged Nikah Nama did not bear the signature similar to that of petitioner---Alleged Nikah of respondent with petitioner, thus, could not be proved---Petitioner was entitled to a decree for jactitation of marriage while respondent was not entitled to a decree for restitution of conjugal rights for want of proof of Nikah. Maqbool Ahmed Awan for Petitioner. Abdul Naeem for Respondent. Date of hearing: 28th June, 1993. JUDGMENT Both of the abovementioned petitions are being disposed of by the common judgment as the facts and the parties are same. Briefly stated the facts are that respondent Muhammad Jameel claims that petitioner Mst. Nighat Maz is his legally-wedded wife. According to respondent Muhammad Jamil, he had married petitioner Mst. Nighat Aijaz on 10-7-1987 against the wishes of the parents of the petitioner. It is further alleged by the respondent that the marriage was solemnized by Haji Muhammad…