2006 PLP 1136 (SCMR)
ZULFIQAR ALI — Petitioner Versus MUSARRAT BIBI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1136 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Falak Sher, JJ |
| Parties | ZULFIQAR ALI — Petitioner Versus MUSARRAT BIBI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1136 (SCMR)?
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 1136 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Falak Sher, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1136 (SCMR) (ZULFIQAR ALI — Petitioner Versus MUSARRAT BIBI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----S. 5 & Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Dowry articles, return of---Agreement not signed by wife---Husband claimed to have returned dowry articles to the wife and relied upon agreement signed by two brothers of the wife---Appellate Court did not accept the agreement and directed the husband to return the articles---Judgment of Appellate Court was maintained by High Court---Validity---Wife was not a party to the agreement and the brothers had denied their signatures on the agreement---Husband could not show any authority given by the wife to her brothers to enter into the agreement with the husband---Judgment of High Court affirming the conclusion reached by the Appellate Court was not open to any exception---Leave to appeal was refused. Ch. Muhammad Yaqub Sindhu, Advocate Supreme Court with M. Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 4th May, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 23-11-2002 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.8970 of 2000).
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.
It is the claim of the petitioner that he had returned the Dowry etc. to the respondent and an agreement (Exh.D/1) was pressed into service to support the said claim. It was rightly held by the learned High Court that Mst. Musarrat Bibi respondent was not a party to ,the said agreement; that according to the petitioner the said agreement had been allegedly signed by the two brothers of the first respondent acting on her behalf which signatures had been denied by the said brothers and that the petitioner could not show any authority given by Mst. Musarrat Bibi to her brothers to enter into the said agreement with the petitioner. (2). In this view of the matter, the findings of the learned High Court affirming the conclusions reached by the learned Additional District Judge, Ferozewala were not open to any exception. (3). This petition is, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused. M.H./Z-15/SC Petition dismissed.