| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2387 2010 SLD 2387 2010 CLC 1729 |
Lahore High Court
SH. AHMAD FAROOQ, J
Ch. Mumtaz Ahmad for Petitioner. Amjad Ali Sherazi for
Respondents
SH. AHMAD FAROOQ, J
Ch. Mumtaz Ahmad for Petitioner. Amjad Ali Sherazi for
Respondents
MUDASSAR BUTT
VS
JUDGE FAMILY COURT, LAHORE and another
Law:
Section:
(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5, Sched. & S. 10(4)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Suit for dissolution of marriage, recovery of dower and maintenance---Trial Court decreed the suit for dissolution of marriage on the ground of `Khula' without adjudicating on the controversy regarding dower---Defendant contended that the Trial Court had violated the provisions of S.10(4) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Validity---Plaintiff denied receiving dower in the shape of gold ornaments at the time of `Nikah' as averred by the defendant---Restoration of `Haq Mahr' not received by wife at the time of marriage was not a sine qua non for passing a decree of dissolution of marriage---Trial Court had already framed issue to determine the payment of dower after recording evidence produced by the parties---Decree passed by the Trial Court was in accordance with S.10(4) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 the object and Scope of S.10(4) was to avoid delay in family cases and provide expeditious remedy to women seeking `Khula'---Impugned order having been passed with lawful authority, did not warrant any interference--Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. (b) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 10(4)---Object and scope of S.10(4), West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964---Object of subsection 4 of section 10 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 was to avoid delay in proceedings of family cases and provide expeditious remedy to women seeking `Khula'---Restoration of `Haq Mahr' not received by wife at the time of marriage was not a sine qua non for passing a decree of dissolution of marriage. Abdul Rehman v. Mst. Hakim and another PLD 2007 Kar. 344 and Muhammad Ijaz Ahmad Khan v. Judge Family Court and another 2005 YLR 2799 distinguish. Abdul Sattar v. Mst. Kalsoom PLD 2006 Kar. 272 ref. Muhammad Ijaz Ahmad Khan v. Judge Family Court and another 2005 YLR 2799 and Aurangzeb v. Mst. Gulnaz and another PLD 2006 Kar. 563 rel. JUDGMENT SH. AHMAD FAROOQ, J.---Through the instant petition, under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of…
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