1987 PLP 658 (CLC)
Mst. MUNAWAR ZATOON‑‑Applicant Versus NISAR AHMAD‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 658 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mahboob Ahmad, J |
| Parties | Mst. MUNAWAR ZATOON‑‑Applicant Versus NISAR AHMAD‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 658 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 658 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mahboob Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 658 (CLC) (Mst. MUNAWAR ZATOON‑‑Applicant Versus NISAR AHMAD‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Raja Muhammad Idrees for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 17th December, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 25‑A‑‑Transfer of suit‑‑Petitioner wife's suit against husband for dissolution of marriage filed at place 'P' was earlier in time than husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights against wife at place 'G'‑‑Common questions of law and facts likely to arise in both cases‑‑To avoid conflict of judgments, both suits, held, should be tried by one and same Court‑‑Husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights pending at place 'G' was ordered to be transferred to place 'P' where wife's suit for dissolution of marriage was pending prior in time against husband. Respondent: Ex parte.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 17th December, 1986. This petition under sections 25‑A and 25‑B of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 seeks transfer of suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled Nisar Ahmad v. Mst. Munawar Zatoon from the Court of Mr. Farooq Nasir, Jadge Family Court, Gujranwala to the Court of Mr. Wahid Aslam Mann, Judge, Family Court, Pasrur, District Sialkot before whom the petitioner's suit against the respondent for jactitation is pending.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit of the petitioner filed at Pasrur District Sialkot is earlier in time than the suit of respondent filed at Gujranwala which is only intended to cause harassment to the petitioner and is a counter‑blast.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner next contends that there are likely to arise common questions of law and facts and, therefore in order to avoid conflict of judgments it will be desirable that the two suits are heard by one and the same Court.
4. No one has appeared for the respondent to contest this petition who has been proceeded against ex parte. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner have force and are well‑supported by the precedent case‑law on the subject of transfer of cases arising under the Family Courts Act. These contentions are otherwise also going rebutted from the side of the respondent.
5. In view of the foregoing discussion, allowing this petition, I would direct that suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled Nisar f Ahmad v. Mst. Munawar Zatoon be withdrawn from the Court of Mr Farooq Nasir, Judge Family Court, Gujranwala and entrusted to the ' Cour, of Mr. Wahid Aslam Mann, Judge Family Court Pasrur, District Siaih(1r for adjudication in accordance with law. Since respondent has not appeared to contest this petition, there Will be no order as to costs. Parties shall appear before the transferee Court on 17‑12‑1986. The Court at Gujranwala from which the suit has been withdrawn shall I transmit the record to the transferee Court well in advance of the date fixed above. The transferee Court shall ensure that the two suits between the parties are fixed on the same dates of hearing to avoid inconvenience to the respondent. H.B.T./168/L Suit transferred.