Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 3055 = 1980 SLD 3055 = 1980 PLD 37
Peshawar High Court
Writ Petition No. 712 of 1979, decided on 22ndOctober, 1979.
Presented By: Karimullah Khan Durrani, J
Fazal Elahi Khan for Petitioners.

ABDUR RASHID AND ANOTHER-Petitioners

VERSUS

Mst. SHAHEEN BIBI AND 2 OTHERS-Respondents

Law: West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5

(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)  S. 5 read with Sched. JurisdictionDowerFamily Court or Court sitting in appeal against its decreePossess exclusive jurisdiction in matter of dower and competent to determine whether any property movable or immovable formed part of dower.[Jurisdiction]. (b) Muhammadan Law  DowerMay be either in cash or kind or in form of rendition of personal service. Holy Quran, Sura 28; Verses 2728.: English Translation, of Holy Qur'an by Mohammad Marmaduke Pictkthal and Principles of Mohammadan Law by Sir D. F. Mulla, S. 285 ref (c) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)  S. 5 read with Sched.Dower, claim forKabeen Nama ratified by petitioner husband firstly by `eejab" and "qubui" evidenced by testi mony of Imam performing Nikah ceremonies and secondly by petitioner's acceptance of liability to pay dower in instalments provided her wife resided with himDecree for dower, passed by lower Courts, held, did not suffer from lack of jurisdiction and findings in regard to genuineness of Kabeen Nama correctly recorded and binding on petitioner.[Jurisdiction].                                                                                                                   ORDER It this writ petition the judgments of the Family Court, Kohat and the District Judge, Kohat on appeal of the former have been assailed. This petition has been moved in the following state of facts. 2. The respondent No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner. She had, on 2931978, instituted a suit in the Family Court, Kohat against the petitioner for the recovery of her dower amounting to (a) Rs. 5,000 is cash, (b) 8 Tolas of gold valued @ Rs. 6,400, and (c) 1/2 of the house described in the plaint. While a money decree was prayed for the items (a) and. (b), decree for possession was sought is respect of item (c) above. This…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register