| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4047 = 2026 SLD 4047 |
Islamabad High Court
W.P. No.114 of 2022
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
01.03.2022 Malik Talat Hussain Advocate for petitioner Mr.M. Akram Shaheen, Advocate for respondents 3 & 4.
W.P. No.114 of 2022
Presented By: ARBAB MUHAMMAD TAHIR
01.03.2022 Malik Talat Hussain Advocate for petitioner Mr.M. Akram Shaheen, Advocate for respondents 3 & 4.
Syed Muhammad Farrukh Abbas
VERSUS
Additional District Judge & 3 others.
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Summary The petitioner challenged the ex parte decree dissolving his marriage by Khula and awarding maintenance and dowry articles, as well as the appellate judgment affirming the decree. The High Court found that the petitioner was repeatedly given opportunities to file his written statement and contest the case but consistently failed to appear, resulting in ex parte proceedings on multiple occasions. Since both the Trial Court and Appellate Court had recorded concurrent findings, and there was no illegality or material irregularity, the High Court dismissed the writ petition. Legal Core Points Courts prefer decisions on merits, but a party who repeatedly neglects proceedings cannot claim relief. Repeated non-appearance and non-compliance justify ex parte proceedings. The High Court will not interfere under Article 199 with concurrent findings of fact unless there is illegality, jurisdictional error, or material irregularity. Writ jurisdiction cannot be used to reopen a case where the petitioner's own conduct caused the ex parte decree. The Family Court's decree granting Khula, maintenance, and recovery of dowry articles was upheld. ORDER SHEET The instant writ petition is arising out of ex-parte judgment and decree dated 03.05.2019, and judgment dated 28.10.2021 passed by the Judge Family Court and the Additional District Judge, Islamabad (West) respectively, whereby suit of respondents 3 & 4 for dissolution of marriage, maintenance allowance and dowry articles was decreed ex-parte while appeal was also dismissed against ex-parte decree. Relevant facts are that on 22.04.2017, respondents 3 and 4 filed suit for dissolution of marriage, maintenance allowance and recovery of dowry articles against the petitioner, whereof, notices were issued to the petitioner who appeared before the Court of First Instance on 27.05.2017, by placing power on behalf of his attorney and the matter was adjourned for filing of written statement by the petitioner for…