| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 863 2008 SLD 863 2008 CLC 1541 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.8202 of 2008, decision dated: 4-07-2008
KH. FAROOQ SAEED, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Writ Petition No.8202 of 2008, decision dated: 4-07-2008
KH. FAROOQ SAEED, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
NIAZ ABBAS
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD and 2 others
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 14,14(2)(b),14(2)(c)
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 14,14(2)(b),14(2)(c)
Law: Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939
Section: 2(viii)(d)
(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------S. 14---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition--Appeal under S.14, West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Scope---Interpretation of S.14, West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Abridgement (impediment on appeal) applies to the -debtor and not to the decree-holder---Principles---High Court, however, observed that family matters were not decided strictly on the yardstick of procedural laws nor any other principle aimed at the observance of the technicalities, since the right of appeal was a vested right and in the case of decree-holder who had already been given a small amount i.e. upto maximum Rs.30,000 or less, the right of appeal from the said poor lady could not be relinquished. Mst. Neelam Nosheen and others v. Raja Muhammad Khaqaan and others 2002 MLD 784; Mst. Atia Wahab and another v. Munir Ahmed and 2 others 2003 YLR 870; Bennion "Statute Law" 3rd Edition pages 97 and 98; A.G. of Canada v. Hallet and Carey Ltd. 1952 AC 427 and Hassan and others v. Chaudhary Tahir Saeed and others PLD 2005 Lah. 97 ref. (b) Interpretation of Statutes--- ----Enactment has the legal meaning taken to be intended by the legislature---Every statute is to be expounded according to its manifest and expressed intention. Bennion "Statute Law" 3rd Edition pages 97 and 98 and A.G. of Canada v. Hallet and Carey Ltd. 1952 AC 427 ref. Syed Faiz-ul-Hassan for Petitioner. ORDER KH. FAROOQ SAEED, J.--- Contends that under section 14(2)(b) of Family Courts Act, 1964, appeal was not maintainable since the amount decreed was less than Rs.30,000. The order, therefore, is illegal and without jurisdiction. In view of the said illegality this writ petition is maintainable and should accordingly be allowed with consequent relief. 2. Before proceeding further the relevant provision of section is reproduced:- "14. Appeal.-- (1) Notwithstanding anything provided in any other law for the time being in force, a decision given or a decree passed by a Family Court shall be appealable--- (a) to the High Court, where the Family Court is presided over by a District Judge, an Additional District Judge, or a person notified…
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