2009 PLP 1152 (YLR)

HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.

Brief fats leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner Mst. Kalsoom Fatima filed a suit for recovery of maintenance and dowry articles or in alternative price' thereof of Rs.1,36,000 in the Court of Judge Family Court, Hafizabad, contending that her marriage was solemnized with Muratab Ali respondent No.3 on 4-11-2006 and she started to perform her marital obligations but the behaviour of respondent No.3 remained strained from the very beginning and he used to beat her on petty household matters and ultimately he sent the petitioner to her parents' house. During the period the petitioner remained with her parents, the respondent neither tried to rehabilitate her nor provided her any maintenance. According to the petitioner, respondent could provide maintenance allowance at the rate of rupees five/six thousand per month and he was asked so many times for the maintenance allowance and also for handing over of dowry articles but he refused. The respondent Muaratab Ali appeared before the Judge Family Court, filed written statement and then issues were framed. In her evidence, petitioner produced Ghazanfar Ali as P.W.2 in addition to her own statement as P.W. 1, whereas the respondent Muratab Ali appeared himself as D. W.1 and produced Jaffar Ali as D. W.2 and Muhammad Zaman as D.W.3. The learned Judge Family Court, after hearing both the parties, dismissed the petitioner's suit for recovery of maintenance, but decreed the same regarding the recovery of dowry articles or in the alternative an amount of Rs.70,000 as price thereof, through judgment and decree dated 27-3-2008.

2. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge Family Court, respondent Muratab Ali filed appeal before the learned Additional, District Judge, who vide judgment and decree reduced the decretal amount from Rs.70,000 to Rs.30,000 vide judgment and decree dated 13-5-2008, which is assailed in the present writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge was ex parte, as the petitioner was not purposely served with notice and as such she was not provided a chance of hearing. Further submits that all the proceedings before the appellate Court were commenced in a hurried manner, which is otherwise an outcome of some underhand game. Adds that the amount awarded by the learned Judge Family Court to the tune of Rs.70,000 was in fact a very less amount than prayed for in the suit but even then the petitioner just to avoid further litigation contended with the same, but unfortunately the learned Additional District Judge without adverting to the specific findings recorded by the trial Court reduced the same in an arbitrary manner.

4. Despite repeated notices and affixation of notice, respondent No.3 has not appeared and as such he is proceeded against ex-parte.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

6. In the present case, if the findings recorded by the learned Judge Family Court in so many words against issue No.1 are perused in juxtaposition with the findings/observations made by the learned Additional District Judge, whereby it is held-- "I do not agree with the proposition of learned counsel for the appellant that no dowry articles were given to the respondent/plaintiff at the time of Nikah by her parents for the reason that in our society it is hard impossible that no parents even in poverty could not give Jahaiz according to their financial status and means to their daughters at their marriage". So when assertion of non-giving any article is ruled out then the meagre amount of Rs.70,000 against the dowry articles could not be substituted with a too meagre amount of Rs.30,

000. In the present era of price hike an amount of Rs.70,000 is nothing.

7. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the learned Judge Family. Court practically adverted to all aspects of the matter in its true perspective and as such the amount of Rs.70,000 fixed against the dowry articles was a reasonable one. Accordingly by allowing this writ petition the substitution/reduction of decretal amount is declared illegal the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge is set aside and the judgment and decree passed, by the learned Judge family Court is restored. H.B.T./K-51/L Petition allowed.