Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 3527 2026 SLG 3527 = 2026 SCP 201
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 5432 of 2025 (Against the order dated 27.10.2025, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in WP No. 63433 of 2025)
Presented By: Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi, CJ. Mr. Justice Naeem Akhter Afghan Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad
Mr. Imran Muhammad Sarwar, ASC.

Ghulam Habib ...Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

Mst. Shazia & others ... Respondent(s)

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5

Law: Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976

Section:

Summary The petition for leave to appeal against the Lahore High Court’s dismissal of a constitutional challenge was refused. The case concerned a wife’s claim to recover gold ornaments (87 tolas, later reduced on appeal to 44 tolas) and maintenance; trial court partly decreed recovery and maintenance, the appellate court reduced the gold award, and the High Court dismissed the petitioner’s challenge. The Supreme Court held that jewellery and bridal gifts given to a woman for her exclusive use constitute her absolute property, fall within “personal property and belongings of a wife,” and fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of Family Courts under the Family Courts Act, 1964; unlawful retention by husband/in-laws permits recovery in Family Court. Petition dismissed; leave declined. Core points Petitioner sought leave to appeal against Lahore High Court’s dismissal of constitutional challenge; leave was declined. Wife sued for recovery of gold ornaments (claimed 87 tolas; appellate court reduced decree to 44 tolas), maintenance, and ancillary reliefs; trial court partly decreed maintenance and recovery. Jewelry/bridal gifts given to the bride for her exclusive use and benefit vest absolutely in her; ownership depends on intent and exclusivity, not label. Unauthorized retention or misappropriation of such items by husband or in-laws amounts to unlawful deprivation of the wife’s proprietary rights. Family Courts have exclusive, statutory jurisdiction to hear recovery claims concerning dowry, bridal gifts, and the personal property and belongings of a wife. The precedent in Muhammad Sajid is distinguishable because that case concerned presents given to the groom’s family, not personal gifts to the bride. Law and sections Legal source Relevant provision / principle Family Courts Act, 1964 Section 5 and the Schedule — confer exclusive jurisdiction on Family Courts over matters including dissolution of marriage, dower, maintenance, custody, dowry, and “personal property and belongings of a wife.” Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Act, 1976 Governs “presents” to the groom’s family;…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register