1989SCMR615 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989SCMR615 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, CJ. Shafiur Rehman, Usman Ali Shah and Naimuddin, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989SCMR615 (PLP)?
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 1989SCMR615 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, CJ. Shafiur Rehman, Usman Ali Shah and Naimuddin, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989SCMR615 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AKHTAR — Petitioner Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A.Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th November, 1988.
- Ghulam Mahmood Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A.Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- M.Javed Butter, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam,
- Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 23-4-1988 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in writ petition No.1217 of 1988). .
S.7--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Suit of wife was decreed by Family Court on the ground of incompatibility of temperament between spouses- Husband's Constitutional petition against such finding was dismissed by High Court after examining evidence to satisfy itself before recording Finding thereon- Leave to appeal against finding of High Court was refused on the ground that being a case of appreciation of evidence, Supreme Court did not see any point to examine evidence afresh. M.Javed Butter, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam,
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.‑‑Respondent No.2 was married to the petitioner on 3‑12‑1977 by her parents as she was a minor, and, therefore, there was no Rukhsati and the marriage was not consumated. She filed a suit for the dissolution of her Nikah on the basis of Khula which was resisted and as a counter‑blast, the petitioner filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights. The suit was decreed as prayed by the Judge, Family Court on the ground of incompatibility of temperament so much so that the respondent was unable to live within the limits prescribed by Almighty Allah. The suit of the petitioner was accordingly dismissed. Several issues were framed and evidence was recorded. And not only this, an effort was also made to bring about a conciliation which failed. The petitioner thereupon filed a writ petition No.1217 of 1988 to challenge the decree but it was dismissed on 23‑4‑1988 as the High Court was of the opinion that "the petitioner has wholly failed to point out any legal infirmity much less jurisdictional defect in the judgment of the learned trial Court". The High Court itself examined the evidence to satisfy itself before recording the above finding. In this view of the matter, it is a case of appreciation of evidence and we do not see any point to examine the evidence afresh. The petition, accordingly, fails and is hereby dismissed. AA./M‑691 /S Leave to appeal refused.