MLD 1989

1989 PLP 249 (MLD)

Mst. RABINA BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus LIAQAT ALI‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Transfer Application No: 597/C of 1988, heard on 11th January, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Munir A. Sheikh, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 249 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Munir A. Sheikh, J
Parties Mst. RABINA BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus LIAQAT ALI‑‑Respondent
Primary Law West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 249 (MLD)?

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 1989 PLP 249 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 249 (MLD) (Mst. RABINA BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus LIAQAT ALI‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)‑‑

Representation

  • Syed Wahid‑ur‑Rehman Gillani for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing: 11th January, 1989.

Headnotes / Summary

‑S.25‑A‑‑Transfer of suit‑‑Wife sought transfer of husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights pending adjudication at place `L' to place `C' where wife's suit for dissolution of marriage and her daughter's suit for recovery of maintenance against husband were pending‑‑Held, wife being a female, it would be highly inconvenient for her to travel to place `L' to defend suit filed by husband against her‑‑In order to avoid conflicting judgments, it was necessary that all suits be tried and disposed of by one and same Court‑‑Since husband had to appear before Court at place `C' to defend suits filed against him by wife and her daughter, it would not be a burden on husband to appear in same Court if his own suit be transfer to that Court and tried with those suits‑‑Husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights pending at place `L' ordered to be transferred to place `C' where wife's suit for dissolution of marriage and her daughter's suit for recovery of maintenance were pending adjudication.

Judgment & Decree

Syed Wahid‑ur‑Rehman Gillani for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 11th January, 1989. Nobody has appeared for respondent though he was present in person on the last date of hearing therefore, he is proceeded against ex parte.

2. Through this application, the petitioner seeks transfer of a suit titled Liaquat Ali v. Robina Bibi at present pending in the Court of Syed Ikhlaq Ahmad, Judge Family Court, Lahore which has been filed by the respondent against the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner has also filed a suit for dissolution of her marriage with respondent which is at present pending in the Court of Mr. Javed Rashid Mahboobi, Judge Family Court, Chunian. Apart from this a suit is also pending before the same learned Family Judge filed on behalf of Abida the daughter of the respondent seeking recovery of maintenance allowance. The suit filed by the respondent at Lahore is admittedly earlier in time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a female and it would be highly inconvenient for her to travel to Lahore to defend the suit filed by the respondent against her. He also argued that in order to avoid conflicting judgments, it is proper that the suit of the respondent be transferred to the learned Judge Family Court at Chunian. The application has been supported with an affidavit. There is no counter‑affidavit filed by the respondent. The respondent has not contested this application as he has not appeared today. There is 'nothing on the record that the respondent ever sought transfer of the suit pending in the Court of Judge Family Court, at Chunian to Lahore. The petitioner is a female. 1t will be certainly inconvenient for her to travel to Lahore to defend the suit of the respondent. Otherwise also, it is necessary to avoid conflicting judgments that all the suits are tried and disposed of by one and the same Court. Since the respondent has to appear before the Court at Chunian to defend the suits filed against him, it will not be burden on him to appear in the same Court if his own suit is transferred to that Court and tried with those suits.

4. This application is accepted. The suit titled Liaquat v. Robina Bibi for restitution of conjugal rights at present pending in the Court of Syed Ikhlaq Ahmad, Judge Family Court, Lahore is hereby withdrawn from his Court and transferred to the Court of Mr. Javed Rashid Mahboobi, Judge Family Court, Chunian for trial and disposal of the same with the suit filed by the petitioner against respondent for dissolution of marriage pending in his Court. The transfer application is disposed of. H.B.T./R‑118/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Suit transferred.