Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5 , 14 , 2

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ---- Ss. 5 & 14--Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (VIII of 1979), S.2(viii) & (ix) --- Dissolution of marriage --- Appeal riled by wife against judgment and decree of Trial Court according to which suit for dissolution of marriage riled by wife against her husband was dismissed earlier in default as neither appellant wife nor his counsel appeared on date of hearing of appeal --- Appeal was re-admitted subsequently and re-heard upon application of wife subject to payment of cost and husband agreed to rc-admission of appeal and accepted cost --- Earlier order dismissing appeal having been passed in absence of wife, re-hearing of appeal of wife, would not amount to review of earlier decision-- Husband who had himself agreed to re-hearing and having received cost, was estopped from re-agitating the matter of re-admission and re-hearing of appeal. Fateh Muhammad v. Abdul Ghani and another P L D 1981 SC 371; Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din v. Chief Settlement Commissioner (Pakistan), Lahore and another P L D IWA SC 829; Muhammad Aslam Mirza v. Mst. Khurshid Begum P L D 1972 Lah. 603 and Abdul Aziz Khan and 3 others v. Noor Muhammad and 5 others 1985 C L C 583 ref. M.D. Tahir for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent No-1. Muhammad Aslam Chatta for Respondent No.2- Date of hearing: 31st March, 1991. JUDGMENT This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 arises out of a suit for dissolution of marriage riled by Mst. Qamarun Nisa respondent No.2 against the petitioner in which she sought the dissolution of her marriage on the grounds of cruelty, bad character of the respondent, Khula and disparity in ages. It was alleged that though the petitioner was 55 years old, respondent   No.2 was aged only 24 years. The suit was contested by the respondent and after its trial was dismissed by the Family Court vide its judgment and decree dated 21st of September, 1988. Aggrieved by this decision respondent No.2 riled an appeal which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 11th of January, 1989 in the absence of the said respondent and her counsel. However, on an application riled…