1986 PLP 2381 (CLC)
NASIR KHAN — Petitioner Versus TAHIRA RASHIDA — Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 2381 (CLC) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Manzoor Hussain Sial, J |
| Parties | NASIR KHAN — Petitioner Versus TAHIRA RASHIDA — Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 2381 (CLC)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 2381 (CLC)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Manzoor Hussain Sial, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 2381 (CLC) (NASIR KHAN — Petitioner Versus TAHIRA RASHIDA — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Waheedur Rehman Gillani for Petitioner.
- Rehmat Ali Malik for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 12th January, 1986.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 13(3)--Provisional Constitution Order (1 of 1981), Art.9--Execution of money decree--Executing Court without resorting to procedure prescribed by law for execution of money decree passed by Family Court, committed judgment-debtor to civil prison for non-payment of decretal amount--High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction set aside illegal order of executing Court.
Judgment & Decree
Nasir Khan petitioner has challenged the impugned orders passed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 in execution of the decree passed by the Judge Family Court, Lahore in favour of respondent No.4.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Civil Judge acted in excess of his jurisdiction by committing the petitioner to civil prison. The procedure provided for execution of money decrees passed by the Family Courts is prescribed under section 13(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, the petitioner, therefore, could not have been committed to civil prison by respondent No.2. It was also submitted that the order of the learned Additional District Judge in rejecting petitioner's revision petition also suffered for lack of jurisdiction.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 did not join issue with the learned counsel for the petitioner on the point raised by him, and stated that the impugned orders are untenable. Section 13(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 provides:- "(3) Where a decree relates to the payment of money and the decretal amount is not paid within the time specified by the Court, the same shall, if the Court so directs, b ~ recovered as arrears of land revenue, and on recovery shall be paid to the decree-holder." Undoubtedly, in the instant case, the above-mentioned procedure nrescribed for execution of money decree was not resorted to, and the petitioner was committed to civil prison illegally. In this view of the matter the impugned orders passed by the respondents Nos. l and 2 are set aside and declared to be of no legal consequence.
3. In the result, this petition is allowed with the observation that the executing Court shall proceed in the matter in accordance with law: