Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 467 2009 SLD 467 2009 CLC 269
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.8580 of 2008, heard on 8-10-2008
ZUBDA-TUL-HUSSAIN, 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

MUHAMMAD AKRAM

VS

JUDGE, FAMILY COURT and others

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 11(2),7(2)

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 11(2),7(2)

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------Ss. 7 & 11-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Producing of witness---Principles---Petitioner intended to produce two witnesses whose names were not included in list of witnesses filed by him along with his written statement---Plea raised by petitioner was that necessity for including names in list of witnesses was that without including their names in that list, petitioner could not even call those witnesses in witness box at his own responsibility---Validity---Family Court was competent to allow a party to include name of a desired witness in list in accordance with S.7(2) of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Witnesses so included in the list could be produced by party, though it could not get summons issued if within three days of framing of issues it had not intimated the court of its desire that a witness might be summoned through the court---Order passed by Family Court was set aside and High Court, in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction, allowed the petitioner to include names of witnesses in list of witnesses---Petition was allowed accordingly. Muhammad Ahsan Nizami for Petitioner. Nawab Ali Meo for Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 8th October, 2008. JUDGMENT ZUBDA-TUL-HUSSAIN, J.---The petitioner and the respondent No.2 are involved in multiple civil and criminal litigation which includes the proceedings of various suits before the Family Court. The respondent No.2 filed a suit for jactitation of marriage which is being contested by tooth and nail by the petitioner on the plea that the respondent No.2 had earlier filed suit for dissolution of marriage thereby admitting the factum of marriage. The petitioner wanted to produce evidence in support of this contention. For this purpose he submitted two applications before the learned Judge, Family Court, one for summoning the record of the suit for dissolution of marriage allegedly filed by respondent No.2, and the other for including the names of two witnesses in the list of the witnesses appended with the written statement. Both these applications were dismissed by the orders, dated 17-3-2008 and…
🔒
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