1987 PLP 699 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. KHALIDA SHAHEEN and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 699 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Mian Burhanuddin Khan and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. KHALIDA SHAHEEN and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 699 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 699 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Mian Burhanuddin Khan and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 699 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SAEED‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. KHALIDA SHAHEEN and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- C.M. Latif Rawn, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- C.A.Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Respondent No. 1.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
- Date of hearing: 2nd February, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 30‑11‑1986, in Writ Petition No.4244 of 1986) . ‑‑Arts. 185(3) & 199‑‑West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964), S.12‑‑Dissolution of marriage on ground of Khula'‑‑Prompt dower‑ Petitioner neither in his written statement nor in his statement before Family Court taking up position that if plea of Khula' was allowed, amount of prompt dower should be refunded to him‑‑Such claim, held, could not be pressed by petitioner for first time in constitutional jurisdiction in High Court‑‑Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
C.M. Latif Rawn, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhary, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. C.A.Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Respondent No.
1. Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 and
3. Date of hearing: 2nd February, 1987. SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the order dated 30‑11‑1986 of the Lahore High Court dismissing the constitutional petition of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner was married to respondent No.1 on 14‑8‑1977. In November, 1985 respondent No.1 filed a suit for dissolution of marriage on a number of grounds including one of Khula'. The learned Family Judge dismissed her suit. Respondent No.1 filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge. After reappraising the evidence the learned Additional District Judge accepted the plea of Khula' and dissolved the marriage. The petitioner challenged the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge in constitutional jurisdiction in the High Court. A learned Single Judge declined to interfere in the matter. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that at the time of the Nikah, he had paid Rs.5,000 by way of prompt dower to respondent', No.1 The learned Additional District Judge while decreeing her suit on the ground of Khula' should have directed her to refund this amount to him.
4. We find little merit in this contention. Neither in his written statement nor in his statement before the Family Court the petitioner had taken up the position that in the event the plea of Khula' was allowed, the amount of prompt dower he had paid should be refunded to him. He could not press this claim for the first time in the constitutional jurisdiction in the High Court. We find no force in this petition which is hereby dismissed. S. Q./M‑39/S Petition dismissed.