15. The judgment of Apex Court approves the
judgment of High Court in case title “Muhammad Akram v. Mst. Hajra Bibi and 2 others” (PLD 2007 Lahore
515), relevant portion of which is reproduced as under:-
“Heard. As regards the question, whether the
suit is competent before the Family Court, it is
the case of respondent No.1, and also held by the
learned Additional District Judge that the matter
falls...
Wife cannot be compelled to live with her husband
18. As far as decree of restitution of conjugal rights is
concerned, it has become redundant as this Court has
already held that petitioner No.1 has been divorced by
the respondent No.1 on 12.03.2013. Even otherwise, it
has been held in “Shamshoo v. Mst. Tahira and another”
(1983 CLC 133) that “a wife cannot be compelled to live
with her husband even if he obtains decree for restitution
of conjugal...
نابالغ کی پرورش کے لیے ذرائع نہیں ہیں تو
اگر والد کے پاس نابالغ کی پرورش کے لیے ذرائع نہیں ہیں تو والدہ کی ذمہ داری ہے کہ نابالغ کی پرورش کرے۔ اس کے علاوہ اس کیس لاء میں تفصیل سےنابالغان کے حوالےسے والدین کی ذمہ داریوں کا تعین کیا گیا ہے۔ *ہمایوں حسن بنام ارسلان ہمایوں وغیرہ* Verified Citation: *PLD 2013 SC 557* ۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔۔ فیملی&nb...
Under sub-section (4) of section 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1964
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that
respondent No.2 instituted a suit for dissolution of
marriage, recovery of maintenance, dower amount and
dowry articles. The suit was contested by the petitioner
by filing a written statement. Pre-trial reconciliation
proceedings were conducted and the suit of respondent
No.2 for dissolution of marriage was decreed on
28.03.2014 under sub-section (4) of section...
Attached property is under the exclusive ownership and possession of the petitioner
3. It is mainly contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that any order
against a person who is not party to the
proceedings is not executable against him.
He has placed reliance on 2006 SCMR 913.
He submits that the attached property is
under the exclusive ownership and
possession of the petitioner and the
judgment-debtor has no concern with this
property. He further contends that the
petitioner...
Established from the record that the petitioner was not party in the suit
5. It is established from the record that
the petitioner was not party in the suit. It is
also established from bare perusal of the
execution petition that the same was filed
against Muhammad Nasir, judgment-writer.
It is also established from the record that no
decree has been passed against the
petitioner. The petitioner never stood surety
or guarantor on behalf of the judgment debtor. The petitioner...
Suit was filed by the minor children against grandfather
7. The judgment titled “Sultan Ahmad v. Judge Family Court and 5 others” reported in (PLD 2012 Lahore 148) is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case and I respectfully do not follow the said judgment for the reasons that in the said case reliance has been placed on the case law titled as “Haji Nizam Khan v. Additional District Judge, Lyallpur and others” (PLD 1976 Lahore 930)....
Petitioner to withdraw the civil suit and file fresh suit
6. In case titled “Sh. Shajar Hussain v.
Haji Abdul Majeed and others” (2006
SCMR 913), it has been held as under:- “After hearing the learned counsel for
both sides and taking into
consideration the fact that the
property was originally owned by the Panjnad Textile Mills, therefore, it
was incumbent upon the
plaintiff/petitioner to have impleaded
it as party and in absence of the
original...
Substantive vested right An appeal is a continuation of a suit.
6. It is an established principle of law that
appeal is not merely a matter of procedure but
substantive vested right. An appeal is a continuation of a
suit. The institution of a suit carries an implication that
all rights of appeal then in force are available to the
litigants till the end. Reference may be made to the case
laws titled as “Muhammad Saleem v. Muhammad Ali
through real mother and 2...
About to leave the country of dispose of his property with a view to frustrate or delay execution of decree that could be passed against him.
“Application under O.XXXVIII, R.5, CPC could
only be granted when sufficient material was on
record that defendants were planning to leave the
country with a view to defeat the recovery of
plaintiff’s claim. No such circumstance existed in
the present case. Vague allegation about intentions
that defendant would leave the country were not
sufficient. Definite evidence was required to be led
before...
It will not be out of context to observe that the intent of legislature while promulgating Family Courts Act, 1964
6. Worth mentioning that under Order XII Rule 6
C.P.C. where defendant admits claim of the plaintiff
either in pleadings or otherwise the court has discretion
to decree the suit on the basis of such admission, to the
extent of admission and proceed with regard to rest of the
claim/controversy and this provision of law enables a
court to dispose of such part of the suit with regard to
which there is...
To take a child from his native land
The court should take into account the conduct of the peccant parent while deciding the matter but it must not penalize the child for it. The Court of Appeal said: “To take a child from his native land, to remove him to another country where, may be, his native tongue is not spoken, to divorce him from the social customs and contacts to which he has been accustomed, to interrupt his education...
Custody of the male child for this principle is only applicable in cases of females
In another case “Mst. Ruqayya Yasmin v. Muhammad
Riaz and others” (1991 MLD 166), it was observed that: “4. From a perusal of the orders passed by the
Guardian Judge as also the Addl. District Judge, it
becomes abundantly clear that the only reason which
prevailed with them for directing that the custody of
the minors be handed over to respondent No.1, the
father, was that the petitioner on account...
Section 17 of the Act, ibid application of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.)
No doubt to achieve afore-noted aims and objects, by
way of Section 17 of the Act, ibid application of Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.) except Sections 10 and 11
has been excluded in order to avoid technicalities by
providing a short, simple and speedy methodology for
settlement and disposal of disputes relating to family
matters. Notwithstanding the fact that provisions of
C.P.C. are not stricto...
Question of custody of minor child in the light of the governing principle of Muhammadan Law
In “Mehmood Akhtar v. District Judge, Attock and 2
others” (2004 SCMR 1839) it was observed by the
honourable Supreme Court to the effect that:
“…The Courts, subject to the welfare of minor,
always determine the question of custody of minor
child in the light of the governing principle of
Muhammadan Law but mere fact that the father
becomes entitled to get custody of minor or mother
has lost the...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Powered by Blogger.
