YLR 2006

2006 PLP 2204 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.3742 of 2005, decided on 16th November, 2005.
Honorable Judges
Sheikh Hakim Ali, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 2204 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Sheikh Hakim Ali, J
Parties MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents
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 2006 PLP 2204 (YLR)?

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 2006 PLP 2204 (YLR)?

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

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2204 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of.1964)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Akram for Petitioner.
  • 2. Petitioner's learned Advocate submits that learned Judge Family Court has failed to grant "Zare-e-Khula" to the petitioner and that the plaintiff/respondent had not asserted and prayed for grant of decree on the basis of "Khula"' in her plaint.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 5, Sched. & 14

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Maintainability

Suit for dissolution of marriage on ground of Khula' and recovery of dowry articles

Suit for dissolution of marriage on basis of Khula' and for recovery of dowry articles, was decreed by Family Court

Contention of petitioner was that Family Court had failed to grant him 'Zar-e-Khula' and that respondent had not asserted and prayed for grant of decree on basis of Khula' in her plaint

Validity

Respondent though had not used word Khula', but in her plaint had narrated the facts which were the cause of filing of the suit

Respondent lady had stated that she had developed extreme hatred against the petitioner; that there was no likelihood of reconciliation between the parties and that she would prefer death rather to remain within the marital union with petitioner

Said words of respondent could well be considered as bringing out plea of Khula' and it was not necessary for her to use specific words of grant of decree of Khula'

Section 14 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 had taken away benefit of filing of appeal against decree granted to the extent of Rs.30,000 for dowry articles

Legislature having barred that remedy to be availed of by petitioner in case of decree of dowry articles to the extent of Rs.30,000, remedy of extraordinary jurisdiction in an ordinary case, of not an exceptional nature, could not be granted to the petitioner

Constitutional petition, in circumstances, was not entertainable against decree of dowry articles.

Judgment & Decree

SHEIKH HAKIM, ALI, J.

Mst. Najma Parveen, had filed a composite suit for grant of decree for dissolution of marriage as well as for recovery of dowry articles before learned Judge Family Court, Layyah, against Muhammad Akram, the present writ petitioner. The suit for dissolution of marriage on the basis of "Khula"' and for recovery of dowry articles to the extent of Rs.30,000 were decreed by the learned Judge Family Court on 18-3-2005. Aggrieved from that judgment and decree, the instant writ petition has been filed by Muhammad Akram.

2. Petitioner's learned Advocate submits that learned Judge Family Court has failed to grant "Zare-e-Khula" to the petitioner and that the plaintiff/respondent had not asserted and prayed for grant of decree on the basis of "Khula"' in her plaint.

3. After considering the arguments and from the perusal of the record, it has revealed that in clauses (iii) and (iv) of para. No.6 of the plaint, Mst. Najma Perveen respondent had narrated the facts which were the cause of filing of the suit. She has also stated in the aforesaid plaint that she had developed extreme hatred and there was no likelihood for reconciliation between the parties. It was furthers stated by her that she would prefer death rather to remain within the marital union of Muhammad Akram, the petitioner. According to these words, 'I cannot subscribe to the view of the learned counsel that these words cannot be considered as bring out the plea of "Khula"". These words used in the plaint are sufficient and it is not necessary for the plaintiff to use specific word of grant of decree of "Khula' .

4. As regard the decree of dowry articles, it is admitted fact that section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964 has taken away the benefit of filing of an appeal against the decree granted to the extent of Rs.30,000 for the dowry articles. As the law framers have barred his remedy to be availed of by the defendant in case of decree of dowry articles to the extent of Rs.30,000 therefore, the remedy of extraordinary jurisdiction in an ordinary case, of not an exceptional nature cannot be granted to the petitioner. I have already delivered a judgment on this point which is reported in M. Ramzan v. Judge Family Court and others (2005 MLD 631). This writ petition is accordingly, not entertainable against the decree of dowry articles to the extent of Rs.30,000 so is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./M-282/L Petition dismissed.