MLD 1989

1989 PLP 2954 (MLD)

Mst. PARVEEN — Petitioner Versus DILSHAD MASIH — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Transfer Application No.352-C of 1989, heard on 24th May, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Abdid Shakoorul Salam, CJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 2954 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdid Shakoorul Salam, CJ
Parties Mst. PARVEEN — Petitioner Versus DILSHAD MASIH — Respondent
Primary Law West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 2954 (MLD)?

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 1989 PLP 2954 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdid Shakoorul Salam, CJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 2954 (MLD) (Mst. PARVEEN — Petitioner Versus DILSHAD MASIH — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)

Representation

  • Jamshed Rehmat Ullah for Petitioner.
  • Nazir Muhammad and Suleman Akhtar for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing: 24th May, 1989.

Headnotes / Summary

S.25-A--Transfer of suit--Wife filing suit for dissolution of marriage against husband in Court at place `L' whereas husband had filed suit for custody of minor and restitution of conjugal rights against her in Courts at place `S'--Wife seeking transfer of husband's suit in Court at place `L' contended that it would be difficult for her to go alongwith her minor daughter to place `S' to defend suits filed against her there, further that she was employed as nurse at place `L'--Interest of justice requiring that all suits inter parties be tried at one place, husband's suits pending in Court at place `S' thus were transferred to Court at place `L' where wife's suit for dissolution of marriage was pending keeping in view convenience of wife since she was working as a nurse at place `L' having a minor daughter with her and also had filed suit there.

Judgment & Decree

Nazir Muhammad and Suleman Akhtar for Respondent. Date of hearing: 24th May, 1989. This order will dispose of TA. No.151-C/89 and TA. No.152-C/89 as these are between inter parties.

2. The petitioner was married to the respondent at Sahiwal and they have a minor daughter aged 5 years. After some time the respondent went away to Libya. The petitioner came back to her parents at Lahore. She has joined service as a Nurse. Firstly, she filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before the learned Civil Judge, Lahore which was withdrawn on 18-3-1989 with permission to file a fresh one. She has now filed a suit for dissolution of marriage which is pending before Mian Nasir Hussain, learned Civil Judge, Lahore. The respondent has filed a suit for custody of the minor before the learned Civil Judge/Guardian Judge, Sahiwal and also a suit for restitution of conjugal rights before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sahiwal. The petitioner-wife seeks transfer of the latter two suits from Sahiwal to Lahore.

2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that while the respondent was going to Libya, he came over to Lahore and left her with her parents. On his return, he came to Lahore and resided with her. She has filed a suit at Lahore and she being a lady and employed a Nurse at Lahore, the two suits filed by the respondents; one for custody of the minor and the other for restitution of conjugal rights may be transferred to Lahore as it is difficult for her to go along with her minor daughter to Sahiwal to defend the suits of and on. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the parties were married at Sahiwal and according to section 3 (2) of the Divorce Act, 1869, the suit could be filed where the parties reside or last resided together. It was contended that the parties lastly resided at Sahiwal which will have the jurisdiction and not the Courts at Lahore.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears to be in the interest of justice and the parties that all the suits inter parties be tried at one place. Since the petitioner is working as a Nurse and has a minor daughter with her and has also filed a suit at Lahore, the two suits filed by respondent one for a custody of the minor and the other for restitution of conjugal rights pending before the learned Senior Civil Judge Guardian Judge and the learned Civil Judge, Sahiwal are transferred to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lahore for further disposal. It will be open to the respondent to raise the objection regarding maintainability of the petitioners suits for lack of territorial jurisdiction. In view of the above, it is directed that the two suits of the respondent for custody of the minor and for restitution of conjugal rights pending before the learned Senior Civil Judge Guardian Judge and learned Civil Judge, Sahiwal are transferred to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lahore for all the suits inter parties to be disposed of. The applications are disposed of accordingly. H.B.T./P-81/L Suits transferred,