Special Oath

2023 YLRN 13 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

Special oathScope

No special oath could be administered and if administered, the same had no utility and could not be taken into consideration.

2023 MLD 483 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 8, 9, 10 & 11Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964), S. 17(2)Power of Attorney Act (VII of 1882), S. 2Dowry articles, recovery ofSpecial oath

Suit for recovery was consolidated with two other matters (for recovery of maintenance allowance and custody of minors) pending adjudication before Family Court and in consequences additional issues were framed

During cross-examination, an offer was made by petitioner's counsel qua decision of the matter through special oath on the Holy Quran by petitioner; which offer was not accepted by respondent/wife

Respondent/wife, instead, signified her willingness to state on oath by putting her hands on the Holy Quran and on the heads of her children that her dowry articles were lying at defendant's house, which proposal was accepted by the petitioner's counsel

On the adjourned date petitioner moved an application that he did not instruct his counsel to make offer to respondent/wife for taking her special oath and that such offer was under misconception

Petitioner's application was dismissed and the statement of respondent/wife was recorded under special oath and her suit for recovery of dowry articles was consequently decreed

Petitioner contended that no specific direction was given by him to his counsel for resolution of the controversy qua dowry articles through special oath; that his counsel was not authorized either to make any offer to other side or to accept any such offer; that whole proceedings regarding offer and so-called acceptance by his counsel took place in his absence; and that procedure adopted by learned trial court for taking special oath was against the law

Held, that document of the power of attorney contained the phrase:

2019 PCrLJ 1176 ISLAMABAD Judicial Precedent

Art. 163Special oathApplicability

Article 163 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 provided a mechanism to accept or deny the claim on Oath, although it was different from Oaths Act, 1873

Article was applicable in the civil proceedings only

Criminal cases could not be decided on Oath.

2018 CLC 1350 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.5 & Sched.Dowry articlesSpecial OathWife made offer of Special Oath only to the extent of claim of dowry articles which was accepted by the husband

Husband while recording his statement on Special Oath regarding claim of dowry articles travelled beyond the offer and introduced a new factum of gold ornaments alleging the same in possession of wife

Held, that voluntary portion introduced by the husband during his Special Oath was not the mandate of the offer made by the wife

Said portion could neither be read in favour of the husband nor against the wife

Constitutional petition was dismissed.

2018 CLC 1350 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 9 & 10Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.163Special OathAcceptance or denial of claim on oath

Where an offer of Special Oath made by one party was accepted by the other party, none could be allowed to travel beyond the offer made.

2017 YLR 2276 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 8Special oath

Principles.

2011 MLD 1377 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 12Oaths Act (X of 1873), S. 10Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 163Specific performance of agreement to sellProofSpecial oathProvisions of Art. 163 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984Applicability

During pendency of appeal before Lower Appellate Court, plaintiff offered the defendant to take oath on the Holy Quran, which he took, resultantly the appeal filed by plaintiff was dismissed

Plea raised by plaintiff was that provisions of Art. 163 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, were not complied with by Lower Appellate Court at the time of deciding the appeal

Validity

When any person made an offer to other party to make statement on oath, such offer was not under Art. 163 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 but under Oaths Act, 1873

If such offer was accepted then the person making the offer could not resile from it

Plaintiff himself made the offer that if defendant would make oath on the Holy Quran that he had not entered into an agreement to sell nor received the consideration amount then his appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn

Offer of plaintiff was duly accepted and defendant made the statement on the Holy Quran to the same effect

Once again plaintiff made statement duly thumb marked by him that he had heard the statement and in view of the statement, plaintiff did not want to prosecute the appeal and same be dismissed as withdrawn, thus it was on that basis appeal of plaintiff was dismissed by Lower Appellate Court

High Court did not find any illegality in the judgment passed by Lower Appellate Court, therefore, the same was maintained

Revision was dismissed in circumstances.

2010 PLD 484 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S.5Oaths Act (X of 1873), S.10Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199Constitutional petitionSpecial oathEffect

Case between the parties was decided by Family Court on the basis of special oath on the Hod Qur'an administered to respondent

Plea raised by petitioner was that the courts below did not appreciate petitioner's offer to respondent for faking the special oath

Validity

Once an offer was made by one party and accepted by the other then the party making the offer could not resile from the same

Offer of party to a suit whereby it undertook to be bound by the statement made on oath by the other party on being accepted by the other party was in the nature of binding agreement

Judgment and decree passed by Family Court and confirmed by Lower Appellate Court did not suffer from any illegality or material irregularity or the judgments and decrees had been passed by exercise of excess of jurisdiction or that they were perverse in nature

High Court declined to interfere in concurrent judgments and decrees passed by two courts below

Constitutional Petition was dismissed in circumstances.

2004 PLD 30 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent

Art. 163Oaths Act (X of 1873), S.8Special oathDisposal of disputePrinciples

If a party or witness in proceedings makes an offer for disposal of dispute on special oath, it is obligatory and not mandatory for the Court to accept the same

Offer of taking special oath can only be accepted if it is not repugnant to justice and decency

When a party cannot substantiate his claim through evidence, the provisions of Art. 163 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 would come into play-

1982 SCMR 1197 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

S. 13 (6) read with Oaths Act (X of 1873)-Eviction proceedings Special Oath-Tenant offering to pay rent as claimed by landlord and also to be liable to ejectment if landlord took oath on Holy Qur'an regarding rent being due at rate claimed-Case adjourned to another date for oath taking-Tenant, however, before date fixed for oath taking withdrawing offer on ground of same having been made on misunderstanding-Landlord bringing Holy Qur'an on appointed date, taking oath on Holy Qur'an affirming rent being due at rate claimed Rent Controller passing order for ejectment-Contended that Oaths Act, 1873 having not been applicable to proceedings before Rent Controller and full compliance having not been made with its provisions and petitioner-tenant having withdrawn offer before actual taking of oath, normal course of inquiry should have been adopted by Rent Controller Held : Matter within discretion of Rent Controller to .permit such type of withdrawal or to refuse permission-Rent

1972 SCMR 649 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

(b) Special oath-Failure of vendee's attorney to accept plain tiff's offer for special oath-Does not prove correctness of plaintiff's assertion regarding nature of transaction.