1985 PLP 1900 (CLC)

Mst. Hanifan Bibi petitioner instituted a suit for dissolution of marriage against the respondent in the Family Court, Faisalabad, on 13-9-1982. Maqbool Ahmad respondent also instituted a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner in the Family Court at Faisalabad on 5-10-1982. The proceedings in the above two suits were consolidated by the Court and parties were called upon to lead evidence. During the pendency of the aforementioned suits the petitioner shifted from Faisalabad to Lahore and submitted the present petition praying for the transfer of the suits, to some Family Court at Lahore on the ground that being a lady it would be difficult for her to go to Faisalabad to pursue the suits and that she also apprehended danger to her personal safety at Faisalabad.

2. The respondent has opposed the petitioner's prayer for the transfer of the suits to Lahore and the learned counsel appearing on his behalf has disclosed that the parties in the aforementioned suits have already concluded their evidence except that the petitioner's statement was to be recorded by the Court when she filed the instant application in the High Court. According to the learned counsel for the respondent the petitioner has been avoiding to appear in the Court on one pretext or the other as her intention is to prolong the proceedings.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not deny that the parties' evidence in the two suits pending in the Family Court at Faisalabad had concluded and that only the petitioner's statement was to be recorded by the trial Court. The present petition was filed by the petitioner after about 21 years of the institution of the suits at Faisalabad on the ground that she had shifted her residence from Faisalabad. The case of Malkani Sahibzadi Tiwana v. Shahbaz Khan 1982 Law Notes (Lah.) 622 relied upon by the petitioner in support of her prayer not helpful because in the instant case the trial at the place from where the petitioner has shifted her residence has almost concluded and only her A statement has to be recorded by the Court. At this stage it would not be in the interest of justice to transfer the suits from Faisalabad to Lahore for the reasons stated by the petitioner. In case the petitioner feels any genuine apprehension to her personal safety at Faisalabad she can approach the Court with a request to allow her statement to be recorded at Lahore through commission. In view of the facts and circumstances noticed above this petition is dismissed but the parties are left to bear their own costs. M.Y.H. Petition dismissed.