| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2884 2010 SLD 2884 2010 SCMR 1840 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 955 and 956 of 2006, decision dated: 3rd November, 2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., CH. IJAZ AHMED AND RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Appeals Nos. 955 and 956 of 2006, decision dated: 3rd November, 2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., CH. IJAZ AHMED AND RAHMAT HUSSAIN, JAFFERI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Sayed ABBAS TAQI MEHDI
VS
. Mst. Sayeda SABAHAT BATOOL and others
Law:
Section:
(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------S.5 & Sched.---Ex parte decree, setting aside of---Scope---Suit for recovery of dowry articles and maintenance allowance was filed by wife in which process was served against husband who refused to accept the same---Two years after passing of ex parte decree by Family Court, husband filed application for setting aside of the decree which was dismissed by Family Court---Judgment and decree passed by Family Court was maintained by Lower Appellate Court and High Court---Validity---Address of husband was mentioned by wife in her plaint which was in consonance with the address of husband mentioned in Column No.10 of Nikahnama---Same address was also mentioned by husband himself before High Court as well as before Supreme Court, even otherwise wife along with her son filed another suit against the husband with the same address---Service of husband had been effected in the case on the same address, therefore, remarks on registered acknowledgement due with regard to refusal of husband showed that he was not misled in view of address mentioned by wife in her plaint---Trial Court was justified to pass ex parte decree against husband---Supreme Court declined to interfere in concurrent s and decrees passed by the courts below---Appeal was dismissed. Ghulam Murtaza's case 1999 CLC 81; Mahboob Ahmad's case PLD 1976 Kar. 978; Bibi anwar Khatoon's case PLD 1988 Kar. 602; Muhammad Iqbal's case PLD 2005 SC 22; Mst. Zubaida Bibi's case 1994 SCMR 1978 and Mst. Ismat Khanum Toor's case 1978 SCMR 335 ref. Maj. Matloob Ali Khan v. Additional District Judge, East Karachi and another 1988 SCMR 747 distinguished. (b) Pleadings--- ----Parties are bound by their pleadings. Murad Begum's case PLD 1974 SC 322 rel. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 185 (3)---Raising of fresh points / pleas---Scope---Supreme Court generally does not allow any party to raise fresh points or pleas which were not raised before the courts below. Ashfaqur Rehman Khan's case PLD 1971 SC 766; John E. Brownlee's case AIR 1940 P.C. 219; Sardar Muhammad Ayub's case 1969 SCMR 96(2) and Ghulam Muhammad's case 1980 SCMR 933 rel. (d) Administration…
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