1991 PLP 2338 (MLD)

RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J.

Through this Intra-Court Appeal, the appellant Safdar All has called in question the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 29-5-1990, upholding the judgment and decree granted to respondent No.1 by the learned Judge Family Court, Gujrat on 27-2-1990, thereby dissolving her marriage.

2. Shortly stated, the facts are that respondent No.1, Mst. Iffat Akram, married the appellant on 2-2-1984. The couple, however, lived together for a short period of fifteen days as husband and wife. 7hetcafter the, appellant left Pakistan for Libya for his employment there. A suit for dissolution of marriage was instituted by respondent No.1 against the appellant on 5-9-1.987 inter alia on the ground that the marriage between the parties may be dissolved on the basis of Khula' because they cannot live as husband and wife within the limits prescribed by Allah Almighty. The learned trial Judge framed as many as six issues arising out of the pleadings of the parties. Issues Nos.4 and 5-A pertained to Khula' and option of puberty, respectively. While dissolving the marriage on the basis of Khula', the learned trial Judge held that the respondent-wife shall return the dower to the appellant received by her in lieu of annulment of her marriage bond with him. The learned Single Judge did not give any finding on the issue pertaining to option of puberty and proceeded to uphold the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court dissolving the marriage between the parties ors the basis of Khula' alone.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel that it was mandatory under law for the learned Single Judge to have decided the issue pertaining to option of puberty as well. However, the learned counsel did not dispute the finding given by the learned Single Judge on issue of Khula'. We do not find any substance in the argument of the learned counsel inasmuch as marriage can be dissolved on any of the grounds urged by the respondent-wife. In the instant case, marriage was dissolved by the learned Judge Family Court on the basis of reliable evidence. In our view, therefore, there was no necessity at all under law to have given findings on other issues. The contention thus being devoid of force is discarded by us. It is in the evidence that the appellant and the respondent No.1 lived together only for fifteen days after their marriage as husband and wife. The learned Judge also noted that the appellant did not choose to contest the suit personally. This is in the evidence that respondent No.1 made a categorical statement that she under no circumstances is prepared to live with her husband. In our view, the finding given by the learned trial Judge dissolving the marriage on the basis of Khula' is based on evidence and we do not find any violation of law and evidence available on record. The case in hand has been decided fairly, justly and in accordance with law. Complete justice has been done between the parties. No case whatsoever for interference has been made out by the learned counsel. This being so, there is no force in the appeal which is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./S-971/L Appeal dismissed.