2013 PLP 2844 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.

Respondent No.1 filed a suit for dissolution of marriage, recovery of maintenance allowance and dowry articles against the petitioner. The petitioner resisted the suit. The learned Judge Family Court framed the issues. Both the parties adduced their respective evidence. The petitioner appeared in witness box through his attorney as he is the permanent resident of Kuwait. The learned trial Court after recording the evidence and hearing the parties decreed the suit on 3-3-2011 whereby respondent No.1 was found entitled for payment of maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.10,000 per month from the date of institution of suit till completion of Iddat period, however respondent No.1's claim for recovery of dowry articles was reduced from Rs.13,07,262, to Rs.800,

000. The petitioner assailed the said judgment and decree of learned Judge Family Court dated 3-3-2012 through an appeal. The learned appellate court vide judgment dated 20-12-2012 dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present petition.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that both the courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence produced by the parties. The judgments of two courts below suffer from misreading and non-reading of record, the respondent has failed to prove her case of dowry articles and submits that the respondent herself admitted that a separate list of dowry articles was handed over to petitioner, the said list is the list on which the decree can only be passed. Learned counsel further submits that the above said list is available on record and as such the learned courts below were not justified to pass the decree on the list submitted by the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for respondent supports the impugned judgments and pointed out that the petitioner has admitted in his written statement when he stated on oath that as per list of respondent he has no objection for passing the decree. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged list of dowry articles claimed by the petitioner is not exhibited on record and as such the learned courts below have rightly passed the decree according to the list of respondent. Learned counsel submits that the learned trial Court should have pass a decree for the amount claimed but the learned trial Court has reduced the claim of respondent for more than Rs.500,000.

4. Heard. Record perused.

5. It is an admitted fact that petitioner in his written statement has admitted the claim of respondent when he submitted his written statement through his attorney. The written statement shows that the petitioner has admitted as under:--

6. The petitioner only contested the claim for payment of maintenance allowance to respondent. In spite of the petitioner's admission the learned trial Court recorded the evidence and reduced the respondent's claim from Rs.13,07,262 to Rs.800,

000. It is also an admitted fact that the alleged list of dowry articles claimed by the petitioner is not exhibited on record and as such there was no option available to the learned Judge Family Court to deny the list of dowry articles submitted by the petitioner. The learned trial Court thus has rightly passed the decree which was affirmed by the learned appellate court. This petition has no force and is dismissed accordingly. MWA/U-9/L Petition dismissed.