Notice of divorce
Notice of divorce legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Petitioner-husband divorced respondent-wife and sent a notice to the Chairman Arbitration Council but did not join proceedings of reconciliation before the Arbitration Council
Claim of the wife for past maintenance, medical charges, maintenance for the period of Iddat and compensation for divorce was accepted by the Arbitration Council
Husband filed revision petition before the Deputy District Officer (Revenue)/Collector which was dismissed
Validity
No restriction existed on the powers of the Arbitration Council to issue certificate for past maintenance, however, such restriction was imposed on the powers of the Magistrate under S.488, Cr.P.C.
Expenditures borne on delivery of the child were to be paid by the husband as he was bound to maintain the wife adequately, which included the medical charges
Award of compensation due to divorce pronounced was not within the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Council
Condition that in case of pronouncement of divorce, the petitioner-husband would pay compensation was stringent, harsh and against the public policy
Husband and wife were supposed to live within the limits of God and they must pay respect to each other and must lead a harmonious life and if same became impossible then they might separate from each other in a respectful way
Said condition might force husband and wife to live with hatred, ill-will and grouse nourished in their hearts against each other, which finally led to many social complications
Impugned order to the extent of compensation was not sustainable in the eyes of law
Factual controversy could not be resolved in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction by High Court
Constitutional petition was partly accepted.
Contention of petitioner-wife was that she contracted marriage with the respondent-husband, however, rukhsati did not take place and notice of divorce issued by the respondent-husband from abroad was not as per law and thereafter, arbitration proceedings were not conducted properly by the Administrator Union Council as neither the respondent-husband himself appeared nor any arbitrator appeared on his behalf for reconciliation proceedings
Validity
Respondent-husband had not denied the execution of the divorce deed/notice of talaq, therefore, the provisions of Art.79 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 were not attracted, particularly when the petitioner-wife herself admitted the receipt of divorce deed
Issuance of certificate of talaq was a technicality which did not find mention in the provisions of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 and talaq became effective automatically after 90 days from receipt of notice of talaq by the Nazim/Administrator of the Union Council
As per Injunctions of Islam, the right of divorce had been conferred upon man who could give divorce to his wife at any time and no encumbrance was put upon the man to give divorce to his wife though the same was one of the things most disliked by God
Constitutional petition was dismissed.
Petition was directed against notice received by the petitioner/wife from Chairman Union Council informing her about the notice of divorce served by husband and offering reconciliation proceedings under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961
Both the petitioner/ wife and husband were residing abroad and for foreign resident Pakistanis, the law had created a remedy and forum for reconciliation between the spouses under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 in the Pakistan Mission in the countries of their residence
Husband should avail that remedy and in case such remedy was not available, then any other competent forum could be approached for relief
High Court directed that husband should approach the Pakistan Mission in the country (abroad) to register the divorce pronounced by him upon the wife and for reconciliation proceedings visualized under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 to be undertaken there
Proceedings before Chairman Union Council, in circumstances, were declared to be incompetent.
Teachers of nationalized colleges were given protection of such scales of pay and other benefits as were not less favourable than those to which the teachers of equivalent qualification, seniority and experience in the colleges maintained by the government were entitled
Protection afforded by the Legislature was personal to the incumbents and there was no guarantee for the higher posts.
"Notice of divorce", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124931767
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Notice of divorce"
2005 C L C 481
MUHAMMAD TALAT IQBAL KHAN through General Attorney‑‑‑Petitioner Versus TANVIR BATOOL through Wasim Iqbal, and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore1986 C L C 589
Mst. RUQIA BEGUM‑‑Petitioner Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/ CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, SIALKOT
Court: Lahore2010 Y L R 1
Khawaja MUHAMMAD SHOAIB — Petitioner Versus NAZIM UNION COUNCIL and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore2004 C L C 828
KHAN MUHAMMAD JAVED‑‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. HAFEEZAN NASREEN and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: LahoreP L D 2005 Lahore 644
Maj. ZAHID HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, ARBITRATION COUNCIL, CANTONMENT BOARD, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents
Court: High Court2016 M L D 1061
Mst. SANA ASIM HAFEEZ — Petitioner Versus ADMINISTRATOR/CHAIRMAN, ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION COURT — Respondent
Court: Lahore1990 S C M R 803
Mst. NAZIRAN‑‑Appellant Versus THE COLLECTOR, SIALKOT and 2 others‑‑Respondents
Court: High Court2010 M L D 989
Syeda WAJIHA HARIS — Petitioner Versus CHAIRMAN, UNION COUNCIL NO.7, LAHORE — Respondent
Court: Lahore1987 C L C 1496
MUHAMMAD SHAHBAZ AHMAD‑‑Petitioner Versus SHER MUHAMMAD and another‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore1987 M L D 766
MUHAMMAD ABDUR RASHID — Petitioner Versus Mst. SHAZIA PARVEEN and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore