| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2880 2010 SLD 2880 2010 SCMR 1811 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition No. 1189 of 2009, decision dated: 18-08-2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., €ˌCH. IJAZ AHMED AND GHULAM RABBANI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Civil Petition No. 1189 of 2009, decision dated: 18-08-2009
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., €ˌCH. IJAZ AHMED AND GHULAM RABBANI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Dr. AYESHA SABIR
VS
. FIDA UL HAQ and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-------Art. 185 (3)---Petition for leave to appeal---Concurrent findings of fact by courts below---Scope---Supreme Court generally does not interfere in concurrent conclusions of courts below while exercising jurisdiction under Art.185 (3) of the Constitution. Khuda Bakhsh's case 1974 SCMR 279; Muhammad Sharif's case PLD 1981 SC 246 and Abdul Rehman Bajwa's case PLD 1981 SC 522 rel. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Arts. 185 (3) & 199--Constitutional jurisdiction---Scope---Constitutional jurisdiction is discretionary in character---He who seeks equity must come with clean hands. (c) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S.5 & Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)---Recovery of dowry articles---Concurrent finding of fact by courts below---Raising of new plea---Suit for recovery of gold ornaments as dowry articles was filed by plaintiff, relying upon a passed by foreign court---Family Court did not consider the in evidence and dismissed the suit---Judgment and decree passed by Family Court was maintained by Lower Appellate Court as well by High Court---Validity---Family Court excluded of foreign country from evidence and such finding of Family Court was not challenged by plaintiff before Lower Appellate Court as well as before High Court, therefore, plaintiff had no legal right to agitate the same before Supreme Court---No substantial question of law of public importance was raised by plaintiff---Leave to appeal was refused. Wali Muhammad's case PLD 1974 SC 106; Raunaq Ali case PLD 1973 SC 236; Haji Muhammad Saifullah Khan's case PLD 1989 SC 166; Ashfaqur Rehman Khan's case PLD 1971 SC 766 and John E. Brownlee case AIR 1940 P.C. 219 rel. Mir Muhammad Ghufran Khurshid, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Ibadur Rehman Lodhi, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos.1 and 2. ORDER CH. IJAZ AHMED, J.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 10-4-2009 wherein Constitution Petition filed by the petitioner against the judgments and decrees dated 2-6-2008 and 15-9-2009 passed by the Judge, Family Court…
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