| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 1048 2010 SLD 1048 2010 PLJ 147 |
Sindh High Court
C.P. Nos. S-107 and 13 of 2008, decided & hearing on 02.10.2009.
SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, JUSTICE
Mirza Sarfraz Ahmed, Advocate for Petitioner (in C.P. No.S-13 of 2008) and for
Respondent (In C.P. No.S-107 of 2008). Syed Fazal Hassan Jillani, Advocate for Petitioner (in C.P.No.S-107 of 2008) and for
Respondent (in C.P. No.S-13 of 2008).
C.P. Nos. S-107 and 13 of 2008, decided & hearing on 02.10.2009.
SHAHID ANWAR BAJWA, JUSTICE
Mirza Sarfraz Ahmed, Advocate for Petitioner (in C.P. No.S-13 of 2008) and for
Respondent (In C.P. No.S-107 of 2008). Syed Fazal Hassan Jillani, Advocate for Petitioner (in C.P.No.S-107 of 2008) and for
Respondent (in C.P. No.S-13 of 2008).
MST. MUSSARAT AND 2 OTHERS
VS
MUHAMMAD NAEEM AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 (XXXV of 1964)-- ----S. 5--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Constitutional petition--Dowry articles, recovery of--Onus to prove--Shifting of onus--Suit for recovery of dowry articles was decreed in favour of wife by Family Court--Order passed by Family Court was set aside by First Appellate Court--Plaintiff failed to prove dowry articles--Validity--Father of plaintiff appeared as supporting witness and stated that at the time of her marriage he had given his daughter dowry articles worth more than Rs.500,000/- and brother in law of defendant received the same--Having asserted such facts, plaintiff discharged her onus to prove and it was for defendant to lead evidence in rebuttal or to shake evidence of plaintiff through cross-examination--Defendant failed to lead evidence in rebuttal, therefore, he had to bear the consequences--Unless Court had come to the conclusion that value claimed in dowry articles was so disproportionate to the known sources of income of family of bride or items were so out of scene with the situation and standard of living of the family, it would be reasonable for Family Court to require plaintiff before it to produce proof of income of her family--It was not alleged, and even if it was alleged, since defendant did not produce any evidence, therefore, no such burden of proving income of parents of bride could be lumped at the door of helpless woman--Same principle would be held true regarding independent witness regarding purchase of dowry articles--High Court found it unfair that after lapse of more than ten years to hold plaintiff only entitled to recovery of articles because ten years was a long period of time and many of the articles might not have been left with any value in them, therefore, High Court ordered defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 400,000/- to plaintiff in lieu of dowry articles--Petition was allowed accordingly. 2004 YLR 2541; 1992 CLC 1940; 2006 MLD 563; PLD 2004 Lah 249; NLR 1985 SCJ 128; NLR 1992 Civil 542; 1990 CLC 1011 and PLD 1997 Lahore 633 ref. Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-- ----Art. 199--Constitutional petition--Maintainability--Questions of fact--Scope--High…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492