1999 PLP 1356 (CLC)
MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. BEGUM NOOR‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1999 PLP 1356 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court (AJ&K) |
| Bench Members | Sardar Said Muhammad Khan. CJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. BEGUM NOOR‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 1356 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 1356 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court (AJ&K) bench comprising: Sardar Said Muhammad Khan. CJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 1356 (CLC) (MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. BEGUM NOOR‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 6th May, 1997.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Shariat Court, dated 1‑3‑1997 in Shariat Appeal No.41 of 1996). ‑‑‑‑S. 14(5)‑‑‑Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), S.42‑‑‑Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act (VIII of 1939), S.2(vii)‑‑ Dissolution of marriage on basis of exercise of right of option of puberty‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal‑‑‑Maintainability‑‑‑Trial Court and Shariat Court had concurrently decreed suit for dissolution of marriage filed by wife on basis of exercise of right of option of puberty and petitioner husband had filed leave to appeal against said concurrent decree‑‑‑Lady under provisions of S.2(vii) of Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 had a right to exercise option of puberty before attaining age of 18 years‑‑‑Leave to appeal could not be granted merely because a legal question was involved in the case‑‑‑Unless public‑at‑large was interested in a question of law, leave to appeal could not be granted in cases of dissolution of marriage. Said Mahmood and another v. The State PLD 1995 FSC 1 ref.
Judgment & Decree
Said Mahmood and another v. The State PLD 1995 FSC 1 ref. Sh. Abdul Aziz, Advocate for Petitioner. Date of hearing: 6th May, 1997. This petition for leave to appeal has been directed against the judgment and decree of the Shariat Court, dated 1‑3‑1997. The brief facts of the case are that the suit for dissolution of marriage on the basis of exercise of right of option of puberty was instituted by the respondent which after taking necessary proceedings was decreed. Consequently, an appeal was preferred to the Shariat Court mainly on the ground that in fact when marriage between the parties was contracted Mst. Begum Noor, the respondent, had already attained puberty and had no right of puberty. The Shariat Court confirmed the finding of the trial Court and repelled the contention that the respondent had no right of puberty. I have heard the arguments and perused the file. The learned counsel for the petitioner, has argued that the decree for dissolution of marriage in favour of respondent on the basis of exercise of right of option of puberty is not tenable in view of material on the record. He has further argued that it was incumbent upon the respondent to exercise the right of option of puberty, if any, immediately after attaining the puberty and not afterwards. He has referred to a case reported as Said Mahmood and another v. The State PLD 1995 FSC 1, wherein it has been held that under Islamic law the wife should exercise the right of option of puberty immediately on attaining the puberty and if a delay is committed in the repudiation of the marriage, she shall lose her right of option of puberty. It may be pointed out that under the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, which governs the case in hand, a woman has right to exercise the option of puberty before attaining the age of 18 years until and unless the law is amended the question of option of puberty is to be decided according to the provisions of the aforesaid Act. Even otherwise, the leave to appeal cannot be granted merely because a legal question is involved in the case. For elucidating the matter subsection (5) of section 14 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Family Courts Act, 1993, is reproduced as under:‑‑ "An appeal to the Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir from judgment, decree or order of the Shariat Court shall lie only if the Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir being satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law of public importance grants leave to appeal. " It is evident from the above provision that unless the public‑at‑large is interested in a question of law, leave cannot be granted in cases of dissolution of marriage. Thus, I see no force in this petition. Hence, it is hereby dismissed. N.H.Q./350/SC(AJK) Leave dismissed.