Law:

Section:

(a) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)--- ----S. 5---Dower---Kabinnama as security of dower---Plaintiff claiming ownership of house in question to lieu of her dower money---Trial Court decreed plaintiff's suit while Appellate Court dismissed the same---Validity---Trial Court had erred in law in treating "Kabinnama" as document of title operating to transfer house in question in the name of plaintiff---Defendant, admittedly, was not owner of house in question, when "Kabinnama" was executed, therefore, no such document could be executed by him---House in question, was, however, not exclusively owned by father of defendant when document in question was scribed---House in question had, in fact, been given to plaintiff only as security or guarantee for payment of dower money---No attempt was ever made to get the same transferred to plaintiff during subsistence of marriage- Appellate Court had prawn wrong conclusion to the effect that "Kabinnama" was spurious document---Authenticity of the same as to its execution and genuineness was beyond doubt as per statements of Handwriting Expert and marginal witnesses- Dower amount as contained in "Kabinnama" was guaranteed and secured by documents to question ---Piatntiff thus had only right to amount of dower agreed and mentioned therein---Dower being debt, plaintiff immediately on dissolution of marriage became entitled to payment of same and she would be entitled to retain her possession over property in question until her dower claim was satisfied. Mulla's Mohammedan Law, Pakistan, 1st Edn., 1983 and Mt. Maina Bibi and others v. Chaudhri Vakil Ahmad and others AIR 1925 PC 63 rel. (b) Word and phrases-- Kabin" and "Kabinnama"---Meaning. Ventakaramaiya's Law Lexcicon With Legal Maxims, Vol.II, 1983 Edn., p. 1234 rel. JUDGMENT Through this revision petition judgment dated 29-2-1984 of the learned Additional District Judge, Gujrat whereby he set aside the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 24-7-1981 and accepted the appeal filed by the respondent, has been challenged 2. The petitioner had filed a suit for permanent injunction against the…