PLD 1991

P L D 1991 Lahore 251 (PLP)

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ATTOCK

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
N/A
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation P L D 1991 Lahore 251 (PLP)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD YOUSAF‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ATTOCK
Primary Law (c) Muhammadan Law
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1991 Lahore 251 (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: (c) Muhammadan Law as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1991 Lahore 251 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1991 Lahore 251 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YOUSAF‑‑Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, ATTOCK). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(c) Muhammadan Law

Representation

  • Muhammad Munir Perachi for Petitioner. Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Respondent No.3.

Headnotes / Summary

0. XXI, R. 32

Muhammadan Law

Decree for restitution of conjugal rights

Decree for restitution of conjugal rights is in its nature of discretionary relief

Mode for execution

Only mode of execution of decree for restitution of conjugal rights provided in O.XXI, R.32, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, manifestly suggested for an indirect pressure for its enforcement

In execution of such decree only process which could be issued was that of attachment of property but not detention for compelling wife to go to live with husband.--[Muhammdan Law]. [p. 255] B

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199

Denial of restitution of conjugal rights on basis that husband had not paid prompt dower, although marriage had been consummated

Findings of Courts below being erroneous in law were set aside and case was remanded for deciding afresh whether husband was entitled to relief for restitution of conjugal rights. [p. 255] C

Judgment & Decree

not a decree for dismissal, but a decree for restitution of conjugal rights on payment of prompt dower. [p. 253] A (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-- _.. 1,.,,,

0. XXI, R. 32

Muhammadan Law

Decree for restitution of conjugal rights

Decree for restitution of conjugal rights is in its nature of discretionary relief

Mode for execution

Only mode of execution of decree for restitution of conjugal rights provided in O.XXI, R.32, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, manifestly suggested for an indirect pressure for its enforcement

In execution of such decree only process which could be issued was that of attachment of property but not detention for compelling wife to go to live with husband.--[Muhammdan Law]. [p. 255] B Muhammadan Law by Mullah; Muhammadan Law, A Digest by Sir Roland Knyvet Wilson; Mst. Rahim Jan v. Muhammad PLD 1955 Lah. 122; Mst. Mulkhan Bibi v. Muhammad Wazir Khan PLD 1959 (W.P.) Lah. 710; Muhammad Zaman v. Mst. Irshad Begum and others PLD 1967 Lah. 1104 and Ameer Ali's Muhammadan Law, Vol. 11 (1929 Edn). S.11, pp.442-440 ref. Mst. Sheo Kumari and others v. Mathura Ram AIR 1936 All. 657 and Imam Shariff and another v. Abdul Manaf PLD 1952 Dacca 465 rel. (c) Muhammadan Law

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199

Denial of restitution of conjugal rights on basis that husband had not paid prompt dower, although marriage had been consummated

Findings of Courts below being erroneous in law were set aside and case was remanded for deciding afresh whether husband was entitled to relief for restitution of conjugal rights. [p. 255] C Muhammad Munir Perachi for Petitioner. Malik Muhammad Jaffar for Respondent No.3. Date of hearing: 24th March, 1991.