Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 341 2009 SLD 341 2009 PLD 359
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 6040 of 2008, decided on 19th January, 2009
MUHAMMAD AHSAN BHOON, J
Ch. Saleem Akhtar Warriach for Petitioner. Bashir Ahmad Chaudhry for
Respondent

MUHAMMAD SHAFQAT

VS

SHAHNAZ BIBI and another

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5,Sched.PartI,ItemNo.8,S.19

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5, Sched. Part I, Item No.8 & S.19---Suit for recovery of dowry or its price in alternative---Appeal against decree for recovery of Rs.2,00,000 passed in such suit---Non-payment of ad valorem court-fee on memo. of appeal---Validity---Provisions of Court Fees Act, 1870 would not apply to such decree as decretal amount was in alternative of dowry articles. Aftab Mohyuddin v. Additional District Judge and 2 others 2004 MLD 696 rel. ORDER MUHAMMAD AHSAN BHOON, J.---Through this Constitutional petition, petitioner has assailed the impugned judgments and decrees dated 18-12-2007 passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Vehari and dated 10-6-2008 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Vehari, whereby, suit for recovery of dowry articles to the extent of Rs.2,00,000 was decreed and appeal filed by the petitioner against the said judgment and decree, was dismissed, hence this petition. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner contracted marriage with respondent No.1 on 24-2-2003 and a month thereafter relations between them became strained which led the respondent No.1 to file a 'suit for dissolution of marriage, recovery of maintenance and recovery of dowry articles. It was maintained in the suit that relations between them remained cordial for few days whereafter petitioner used to abuse and beat her and even false allegation of adultery was levelled against her and she was thrown out of his house in plain clothes only after one month of marriage. She further stated in the suit that no effort was made by the petitioner for rehabilitation. As per contents of the suit it was further maintained that at the time of marriage, she was given dowry articles valuing Rs.2,32,141 qua which a list was attached with the suit which was marked as Exh.P1. 3. The suit filed by respondent No.1 was contested by the petitioner and a written statement was filed by him. Out of the divergent pleas of the parties, following issues were framed:-- "(1) Whether this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon this suit? OPD (2) Whether the matter in dispute has been finally heard, disposed of and had…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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