2005 PLP 795 (YLR)

Hameedullah Khan Khattak for Petitioner. S. Saeed Hassan Sherazi for Respondent. Date of hearing: 2nd December, 2004. Shortly narrated the facts, leading to filing of instant transfer application under section 25‑A of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 are that Nikah of Mst. Deeba Khanum, petitioner with Muhammad Jamshed respondent was recited on 12‑8‑2001 at Bannu and `Rukhsati' took place on 22‑8‑2003. A son was born out of the wedlock. After some time of the marriage, relations between the couple became strained due to stated ill‑treatment of the respondent, which obliged the petitioner to leave the house of the respondent and take abode in the house of her brother at Bannu. The respondent filed suit on 10‑6‑2004 before learned Senior Civil Judge/Judge Family Court, D.I. Khan against Mst. Deeba Khnaum for restitution of conjugal rights. Mst. Deeba Khanum also filed suit on 26‑6‑2004 before learned Senior Civil Judge/Judge Family Court, Bannu for payment of dower, maintenance and recovery of dowry articles.

2. In the instant application, petitioner seeks transfer of suit filed by her husband Muhammad Jamshed for restitution of conjugal rights which is now pending in the Court of a Family Judge at D. I. Khan to a Family Court at Bannu where suit filed by net for recovery of dower and maintenance etc. is pending. The application is resisted and claimed to have been filed malafidely.

3. Mr. Hamidulalh Khan Khattak, Advocate for the petitioner and S. Saeed Hassan Shah Sherazi, Advocate for the respondent heard. Record perused.

4. Ordinarily, in dealing with applications for transfer of cases, the deciding factor should be the convenience of the female. The law relating to family disputes exhibits far greater solicitude and concern for the convenience of the female than for the convenience of the males. This is made clear by proviso to Rule 6 of Family Court Rules.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner is a `pardanashin' and is residing in Bannu where the marriage of the parties was performed, after having fallen with her husband and that it would be inconvenient for her to travel all the way to D. I. Khan to defend herself there and that the same questions of fact and law are likely to arise in the suits for recovery of dower amount etc., and restitution of conjugal rights and that it would be in the interest of justice and both the suits are tried by one and same Court to avoid conflict of judgments. Kaniz Bibi applicant v. Sooba respondent (1996 CLC 632 Lahore). Anees Ahmad petitioner v. Mgt. Samina Ashraf respondent (1992 CLC 100 Lahore), Saadia Perveen Akhtar petitioner v. Humayun Iqbal respondent (1983 CLC 2489 Lahore) and Mst. Shazia Parveen petitioner v. Muhammad Ashraf respondent 2002 MLD 1428.

6. In the result and for the foregoing discussion, I allow this application and transfer suit No.140/FC titled 'Muhammad Jamshed v. Mst. Deeba Khanum' for restitution of conjugal rights from the Court of Civil Judge‑II/Judge Family Court, D.I. Khan to the Court of Senior Civil Judge/Judge Family Court, Bannu for its adjudication along with suit titled `Mst. Deeba Khanum and another v. Muhammad Jamshed'. Both the Courts be informed accordingly. Parties are directed to appear before learned Senior Civil Judge/Judge Family Court, Bannu on 4‑1‑2005. H.B.T./312/P Application allowed.