| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1965 SLG 4463 = 1965 SLD 4463 = 1965 PLD 5 |
West Pakistan Peshawar
Regular Second Appeal No. 182 of 1963, decided on 1st July 1964.
Presented By: Faizullah Khan, J
M. Abdul Samad Khan for Appellant. Sheikh Abdul Majid Khan for
Respondent.
Regular Second Appeal No. 182 of 1963, decided on 1st July 1964.
Presented By: Faizullah Khan, J
M. Abdul Samad Khan for Appellant. Sheikh Abdul Majid Khan for
Respondent.
Mst. SARWAR JAN-Petitioner
VERSUS
ABDUL MAJID-Respondent
Law: Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (VIII of 1939)
Section: 2(7)
Law: Limitation Act (IX of 1908)
Section: 120
(a) Muhammadan Law -Option of puberty-Minor girl retains option till age of 18-Right of annulment continues until she expresses her consent or disapprobation in express terms-Mere consummation does not put an end to right-Consummation, to be effective, must be with wife's consent-Withholding of assent to marriage may be expressed in variety of ways (e.g., remarriage before age of 18 or institution of suit for dissolution, etc.)-Marriage not consummated-Mere institution of suit for dissolution automatically annuls marriage-Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (VIII of 1939), S. 2 (vii). Hamilton's: Hedaya (Grady's), p. 38; Abdul Karim v. Mst. Amina Bibi 157 I C 694; Malka Jehan Sahiba v. Mohammad Askaree Khan 1873 L R I A (Supp. Vol.), p. 192; Muhammad v. Emperor 140 I C 617 and Mst. Hasan Bib! v. Fazal Elahi 121 I C 381 ref. (b) Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Art. 120 Limitation applicable only with reference to particular cause of action Plaintiff entitled to successive causes of action in regard to same matter-Entitled to independent period of limitation in respect of each such cause. Limitation applies only to the particular cause of action on which a suit is based and where such cause of action is not barred the fact that the period of limitation has expired with reference to another suit of a similar nature in respect of the same subject matter but based on a different cause of action does not affect the suit based on the former cause of action. Hence, where the plaintiff is entitled to successive causes of action in regard to the same matter, he will be entitled to an independent period of limitation in respect of each such cause of action. Ghulam Rasul and others v. Rahim Bakhsh and others A I R 1930 Lah. 284; Hakim Singh v. Waryaman 140 P R 1907; Khem Singh v. Kesar Singh 122 P L R 1910; Jahana v. Wali 98 P R 1919 and Muhammad Hanif v. Ratan Chand A I R 1922 Lah. 94 ref. (c) Muhammadan Law -Option of puberty-No limitation prescribed for obtaining judicial decree-Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (VIII of 1939), S. 2 (vii). Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, Vol. I, p. 267 (Egypt Ed.) ref.…