2011 PLP 2367 (YLR)

SYED KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J.

This constitutional petition is directed against a decree dated 15-3-2007 passed by Mr. Muhammad Saeed Ullah, learned Addl. District Judge, Faisalabad, whereby he modified the decree of recovery of dowry articles passed on 21-10-2005 by Mr. Ghulam Farid Qureshi, learned Judge Family Court, Faisalabad and consequently the suit to the extent of recovery of dowry articles was decreed as prayed for.

2. In the suit for recovery of maintenance as well as recovery of dowry articles it was alleged by the plaintiff that at the time of her marriage dowry articles amounting to Rs.599,355 were given to her. It was further stated that the treatment of the defendant with the plaintiff was cruel and she was recovered from the house of the defendant on a petition filed under section 491, Cr.P.C. She has claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs.5;000 per month and prayed for a decree of recovery of dowry articles.

3. In the written statement the allegations levelled in the plaint were controverted and it was denied that the dowry articles valued in the plaint were given to the plaintiff at the time of her marriage. The defendant produced his own list of dowry articles.

4. Learned Family Court proceeded to frame issues out of the pleadings of the parties and after recording the evidence passed a decree for return of dowry articles to the tune of Rs.150,000 while the maintenance of Rs.1000 per month was fixed.

5. The plaintiff of the suit being dissatisfied with the grant of decree assailed the same before the learned First Appellate Court, which accepted the appeal and decreed the suit for recovery of dowry articles as prayed for vide judgment impugned in the instant petition.

6. The parties have been heard and record perused. It is in the evidence of the parties that dowry articles mentioned in the list attached with the plaint and proved in the evidence were given to the respondent at the time of her marriage. The fact that the respondent was recovered from the house of the petitioner by filing a petition under section 491, Cr.P.C. has not been denied by the petitioner any way. This fact proves that the respondent did not take away the dowry articles or any other article along with her when she was recovered' by the Bailiff of the Court. It is also not possible that when the petitioner treats his wife cruelly and for the purpose of her recovery legal recourse has to be adopted, the respondent could never dare to take away any dowry article to her parents, house. Learned First Appellate Court has kept all these facts in view while decreeing the suit of the dowry articles as prayed for. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any misreading and non-reading of the evidence on the part of the learned First Appellate Court, as such the findings of the learned First Appellate Court are liable to be affirmed. For the foregoing reasons, this petition having no merits is dismissed. S.A.K./M-947/L????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.